Entertainment – Page 7

My Review of Patterns of Evidence: Exodus

IMDB Patterns of Evidence: Exodus (2014)

I watched this movie on Netflix the other night. Its narrative style reminded me of Jesse Winton’s Targeted although this movie was made prior. It begins with a question, some people are talked to and then more questions are asked followed by more interviews. A small portion of the film is narrated by actor Kevin Sorbo.

The movie was well done and sounded really familiar to me. The basic question was, is there evidence that the Exodus is an historical fact or just a biblical myth? The groundwork was laid steadily until they got to one of their most important points. (Please note that the discussion which follows will include spoilers to plot points in the film.) What was made clear is that many modern archeologists give an unequivocal “NO” answer to the question; however, the film posits an alternative.

The party line in the archeological community is that Rameses II was the pharaoh of the Exodus. While this does agree with Cecil B DeMille, it is clearly at odds with the biblical narrative.

Secular historians assume the modern construction of the Egyptian timeline is correct which is not true. I recalled reading many years ago about this in a book by Gary North.

Readers are also not informed of the fact that virtually all chronologies of the ancient Near East and pre-classical Greece are constructed on the assumption that the conventional chronology of Egypt is the legitimate standard. What modern scholars believe is the proper chronology of Egypt is then imposed on the chonologies of all other civilizations of the ancient Near East, including the biblical chronology of the Hebrews. Thus, when the Bible says explicitly that the Exodus took place 480 years before Solomon began to construct the temple (I Kings 6:1), historians interpret this information within the framework of the hypothetical Egyptian chronological scheme.

When they even admit that the pharaohs of the supposed dynastic era of the fifteenth century before Christ were extremely powerful kings-men like Thutmose III-whose mummies still exist, they are tempted to ignore these difficulties, or even to ignore the clear teaching of the Bible. Many of them date the Exodus much later. They allow a hypothetical chronology of Egypt to dictate their interpretation of Scripture. This is not the way that Christian scholarship is supposed to be conducted.

Moses and Pharaoh pages 7 & 8 (1985)

I have three criticisms of the film for points that they didn’t make.

Point One: The easiest way to prove that Ramses II is not the pharaoh of the Exodus is that we know where he was buried. He died of old age not by drowning in the Red Sea. In fact his body is on display in a museum.

Ramesses II originally was buried in the tomb KV7 in the Valley of the Kings, but because of looting, priests later transferred the body to a holding area, re-wrapped it, and placed it inside the tomb of queen Inhapy. Seventy-two hours later it was again moved, to the tomb of the high priest Pinudjem II. All of this is recorded in hieroglyphics on the linen covering the body. His mummy is today in Cairo’s Egyptian Museum.
Link” Wikipedia Ramsses II

Point Two: It is clear from watching the film that the archeological community demands that members of its community follow the party line. The tyrant of academia is never directly mentioned, but it is clearly understood that their orthodoxy must be followed if you want to get funding and work in the field. Anyone who has watched Ben Stein’s Expelled will have “the eyes to see” this construct in action.

Point Three: this one is more subtle but my impression from watching the film is that Egypt loves the archeology and tourism but they have no interest in validating any claims that might bolster the Jewish faith. The Muslim folks don’t seem to allow you access to their historic sights if you rock their boat by dissing their ancestors.

On the whole, it’s well worth your time to watch, especially if you have children in the audience. It starts slow but builds to a satisfying conclusion “for the hope that is within you”.

Comments on Beauty and the Beast

My protestations notwithstanding, the wife demanded to see Disney’s Beauty and the Beast. (Anything that passes as a musical will usually get her to purchase a ticket. Thankfully, she went with someone else to see La La Land.) Anyway, I admit that I made treks to the little boy’s room and snack bar during the film but what I did see of the film seemed really overhyped as far as the “rainbow people” was concerned. I’ve seen worse on broadcast television. It was blink and you miss it sort of stuff. Based on the posts from Focus on the Family and their fellow travelers, I was braced for some in your face propaganda; thankfully this was not the case. Unless you’re waiting to be offended, most of this stuff will go past both you and your children with hardly a notice.

The wife might be entertaining a return visit to go to the Beauty and the Beast Sing Along but I will sit that one out. Visions of The Rocky Horror Picture Show somehow do harm to what I might expect to see upon attending such an event. Girls Gone Wild meets off keyed singing; single guys, this might be your best opportunity since Sacramento hosted the Xena: Warrior Princess Convention several years ago.

Diversity in Media

“Any character that was diverse, any character that was new, our female characters, anything that was not a core Marvel character, people were turning their nose up.”
Link: David Gabriel, VP of sales for Marvel

So what has Marvel been up to lately?

Over recent years, Marvel has made efforts to include more diverse and more female characters, introducing new iterations of fan favourites including a female Thor; Riri Williams, a black teenager who took over the Iron Man storyline as Ironheart; Miles Morales, a biracial Spider-Man and Kamala Khan, a Muslim teenage girl who is the current Ms Marvel.

Writer of the Kamala Khan Ms Marvel series, G Willow Wilson responded to Gabriel’s comments … and criticising Marvel’s tendency to introduce the new iterations of fan favourites by “killing off or humiliating the original character … Who wants a legacy if the legacy is shitty?”

If this sounds familiar, it should. George Takei, said something similar about the last Star Trek movie, when producers decided to make his character—Hikaru Sulu—into a homosexual, complete with “husband” and baby. Takei said they should have made a new character, not changed the cannon of Star Trek.
“Unfortunately, it’s a twisting of Gene’s creation, to which he put in so much thought. I think it’s really unfortunate” – George Takei

Hollywood is hell bent on making this issue one that you can’t avoid. Look at it from their point of view, they get to simultaneously teardown some part of an American symbol or institution and replace it with something else.

Partly, this is laziness on their part described as creativity. Stan Lee or whoever pours decades of work into something and then some young punk comes along and highjacks it in the name of diversity. Why? It’s hard to make an original thing successful.

Revisionism, especially as it relates to homosexuality, is just the latest fad in Hollywood. Xena: Warrior Princess and Wonder Woman are slated to become “gender-benders”. Xena is being revived by NBC as a television series and Wonder Woman—in her second movie—is expected to “come out”.

This is just the latest iteration of Democrat group politics. No character stands on its own merits. Everybody is just assumed to identify with a group, and the group must advance or no one does. This plantation mentality is just dumb and shortsighted; not to mention insulting.

Dear Hollywood Liberals, the more you push these issues, the less of your products that I will buy. I want characters that are entertaining and have a moral code not ones that get their identity with who they sleep with.
• I dumped my DirecTV a year ago because of this.
• I’ve seen every Star Trek movie except the last one because of this issue. Oh, and I will take a pass on the new Star Trek TV show on CBS because you are pushing homosexual characters.
• I’m done with most everything Disney because of this and yes, Disney there are many children in this country that have never owned a Mickey Mouse piece of clothing or even know who you guys are because of your abandonment to “family values”. If Star Wars or Marvel movies go the direction of Star Trek then I’m done with them too.

I want something my children can see that has good role models not morally broken ones. If I want my kids to see morally broken people and what they are really like then I’ll let them watch the evening news not your programming.

Television Is Bleeding Viewers—Part II: Beware Family Programs

There once was a time when television that was on before 9 PM was “family programming”. Those days are long past. If you have DirecTV or Dish you can catch the later programming three hours earlier in many instances—at least if you reside on the Left Coast. But if that was the extent of my gripes then this blog post would be nonsense.

Sadly, many programs that parents once assumed were ok for children to watch unsupervised are now stealth propaganda shows trying to subvert the beliefs and values you are trying to teach your children. While this complaint has probably been around since I was a wee lad, lately Hollywood has gone from subtlety to in your face and shove it down your throat.

The target of my ire over the last few years has been shows based on comic books. Why, because I like science fiction as a genre and comic books in particular. These have long been the things that young boys tend to gravitate towards. Lately, shows based on comics are very popular. In this discussion, I am excluding those shows targeted at adults like The Walking Dead, Luke Cage, Dare Devil, and Deadpool. Instead I’m talking about Warehouse 13, Marvel’s Agents of Shield, Supergirl, Legends of Tomorrow, Star Trek and similar shows.

If any of these titles surprise you then you are not up on current events.

All these programs and many more are pushing homosexual characters; often as normal folks that are good role models. What disturbs me is that these shows are trying to desensitize people—especially youth—to this sinful behavior and attack on the Judeo-Christian roots of Western Culture. If you are a Christian, then you need to recognize that this is a direct attack on you, your family, faith, and your God.

I will now state what many have been trying to avoid. Homosexuality is a sin. It’s acceptance by any culture has been a clear indication of that culture’s impending demise. This is a sin that is repeatedly singled-out in the Bible as one whose practitioners will not be allowed into Heaven—unless they repent. Please note that by definition, repentance requires turning away from sin and turning to what God defines as right. In this particular case that would at the very least mean being delivered from this kind of “lust of the flesh”. Ceasing and desisting of the behavior is not enough, going a different direction is. Scripture is clear that repentance and forgiveness are gifts from God, not something that we have the power to do on our own.

Many other once familiar and family friendly programs are reportedly considering moving to gender-bending characters include Fantastic Beasts (set in the Harry Potter universe), Star Wars and Wonder Woman. However, the show I wish to spend the next few paragraphs on is Supergirl.

Last year, Super Girl debuted on CBS. It was a good show and one that my son really liked. Due to the cost per episode, CBS decided not to renew it. However, CW came along and worked out a deal to pick up the program. It was well known that the budget would be reigned-in. One lead character was written-off in order to achieve fiscal viability. I was fine with this and understand that changes would be made but oh my, the changes.

Part of the premise of the show is that Supergirl was “adopted” and raised by the Danvers family and thus Supergirl has a stepsister. This year, the stepsister was given a love interest; specifically a female CSI character.

Below are a few quotes from a website ecstatic about this character development. Just so I can assure you that the context is not distorted, I’ve included long excerpts of the quotes below.

Season 2 will also be introducing the DC Comics-based Science Police, who deal with metahuman threats. The new character Maggie, an “out and proud detective,” will apparently be representing the agency in National City.
Link: Super Girl adds Characters

Dany: There’s often this misunderstanding (trust me, I wrote about The 100 multiple times, so I know all about it) that LGBTQIA TV watchers just want happy stories for LGBTQIA characters. But what we’re really after is authenticity. We want stories that feel familiar. And since it’s not Reagan 2.0 times just yet, that means something other than “two ladies fall in love and then one of them dies lol.” And the stories of Alex Danvers and Maggie Sawyer provide exactly the kind of refreshingly honest storytelling so many of us have been craving.

Late-in-life coming out stories? Yup. They happen. And that need to embrace all the things at once tends to be chaotic and even a little destructive for anyone who happens to get pulled into the intense gravity of someone figuring out they’re gay for the first time. So I absolutely believe that Alex would be magnetized to the first gay woman to truly open her eyes. And I 100% know that Maggie is right to throw up the defenses and not let Alex in so easily. That uneasy, awkward but beautiful kiss felt so real. I have been there. Gosh, have I been there.

Maybe Alex and Maggie will make it work in the long term. It seems so clear to me that Maggie does have feelings for Alex—that’s why she didn’t rush in like a fool. Maggie is mature enough to know that she wants something real with Alex, and that’s just not in the cards right now.

All of which is pretty emblematic of Supergirl so far this season. Winn and James slowly making moves to be heroes, Mon-El not immediately rushing headlong into danger, M’Gann recognizing J’onn’s need for life-giving blood and weighing her options—there’s so much maturity and depth in these characters. No one is perfect, but they’re all able to recognize the world around them and pivot when they need to.

As much as I love Alex and Maggie’s story, I might love Alex and Kara’s even more. At first I didn’t get why Kara was struggling with Alex coming out, but of course it was because she felt guilty for drawing focus with her own, alien secret. Of course Alex would temporarily get bogged down in the regret of not having seen Alex as she was for so long. And of course Kara figured out what she was feeling, sharing that honesty with Alex as they work together to help Alex work through this huge revelation in her life.

Honestly, after one of the worst weeks in recent history, I think Supergirl was genuinely saving lives tonight. Well done.
Link: Alex comes out

Anyway, gay ladies and queer-bait-but-i’ll-take-it ladies are where it’s at this episode! First you’ve got Maggie and Alex, which, to be fair, as a plot are a little shoe-horned in. Maggie’s almost-death doesn’t take up a lot of emotional space in the midst of all the action, but that’s okay. What really matters is that Alex was there for rescues. Also, Alex has a much better coming out to her mother, thank goodness. After Kara kind of pulled an “it’s all about me, this coming out,” Dr. Danvers not only knew exactly what was happening, she also was quick to let Alex know how special she is and the pride she should feel in who she is. All of which led to Alex telling Maggie that, hey, Alex isn’t just gay for Maggie—she’s gay for every lady. Despite the “well, I almost died, sooo…” reason Maggie gives before finally kissing Alex for real, the more obvious reason this coupledom could actually begin in earnest is because Alex is truly finding herself.
Link: Cyborg Superman

When I found out that CW was going forward with this character development, I told my son that it was likely that we would no longer be watching the show. Last year Supergirl was his favorite. The first two episodes this year were really fun to watch but then the homosexual card was played in episode 3 and mom and I agreed that the show was coming off the DVR. The poor little guy was devastated. He began crying. He wasn’t crying because I’m a mean dad but because something he really liked was purposely destroyed and he would have to give it up. (He already had to give up Boy Scouts due to their abandoning their vow to be morally straight.)

I have killed many shows on the DVR so far this year and a few more will be off of it by the end of the month. One show that I once enjoyed was Gotham. It is an adult show and one my son never got to watch. And yes over the years the character Barbara has been revealed to be bisexual but she was also evil and insane so deviant behavior was part of her character. I tried to fast forward (or mute the volume) thru these parts but then this year they broke new ground that was the proverbial bridge too far. The creators of the show defiled the cannon of Batman lore by making Penguin and Riddler lovers. Yuck. Having grown up with Adam West and Burt Ward as Batman and Robin, this was anathema to me.

If NBC wants to put this kind of stuff on their gay channel Bravo and I don’t want to watch it then that’s ok but when the big studios try mainstreaming homosexuality then I’m just not gonna watch. Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu are getting my business much more than these guys. Like their nightly news programs did a generation ago, I just can’t trust the big networks to do the right thing.

Oh, while I’m talking about subscription services, CBS just lost a potential subscriber when the new Star Trek announced earlier this week that they were including a homosexual character in the new series. Just for theirs and Paramount’s information, I have faithfully watched every Star Trek TV series and own multiple copies of the movies—except the last one where Sulu now has a baby and male love interest.

The point here is that I’m voting with my wallet and my time.

Oh and just to spite all you people that are angry with me, I just bought the new season of Fixer Upper on Amazon.

Movie Review: Targeted

My wife thought my previous version of this review was too harsh so I’ve rewritten this blog to reflect her critique.

Last night there was a nationwide screening of the documentary Targeted: Exposing the Gun Control Agenda.
Link: Targeted The Movie
The film was made by Jesse Winton and his father Randy . This is the Winton’s second film. Their first was on the subject of adoption.

I saw the movie at a theater in Folsom, CA. Jesse and Randy were both in attendance. I have known them for several years. Also in attendance was the sheriff of El Dorado County—John D’Agostini—who is featured in the film and Paul Shaver—who portrayed the gun maker in the film.

Targeted is the story of 20 year old Jesse Winton as he explores gun control and the Second Amendment. The story was believable and compelling. It reflected the Winton’s family values without being “in your face” about it. It was logically presented. The movie makes an historical case for the linkage of bearing arms and freedom. It begins in the present and explores the background of where the Second Amendment originated. It presents a logical case for how the Founding Fathers built upon the work of others and asserted that the Declaration of Independence was an expression of existing beliefs about the relationship of a sovereign to his people. The film was about an hour long plus the panel discussion that follows.

The film is a challenge to the American people to embrace their heritage. Winton reminds us that Rights come from God not government; therefore, government has no right to deprive people of Liberty; especially with false promises of security.

There will be another showing October 5th. I recommend that you get a few friends to go see the movie. However, please be careful how you invite people. If you mention the title of the movie on Facebook, know that your post and account will be subject to censorship or worse.

Other Thoughts

Please sir, can I have some more?

The thing I really wanted to see more of was politicians calling for gun control that had no idea what they were talking about. These video clips were presented in a staccato fashion and the moment passed too quickly.

I know this project took about three years to get from concept to cinema. I also know that there is lots of great footage that literally didn’t make the final cut. I hope they add a feature on the DVD to give us a look at some of this material. My recollection is that they have some great footage of Diane Feinstein saying some outrageous things about guns (probably on more than one occasion).

Comments on Production Quality
Production and editing were good; especially considering the shoestring budget that was used to make the film. Photography was good but a few spots were too dark or a little off on the exposure settings. Some shots using magnification were slightly pixelated—most of these were outdoor shots of scenery. (That’s the risk you take when you need to get something on the first take.) The film’s audio was well done; however, the panel discussion following the film had some audio issues but I’m not sure if it was from emulating stereo sound or just the challenges of miking five people simultaneously during a live production.

The most difficult thing to watch in the film was the television clips at the beginning. Several were hard on my eyes because the video quality was poor. It seemed like they were made with a camera in front of a television set or lifted from low quality YouTube uploads. Perhaps it’s one of those things where it looks great on a monitor but when magnified to the proportions of a movie theater screen, it just shows all the blemishes that seemed minor on a television.

A Story Concerning 13 Hours

A friend of mine is retired from the Air Force. Recently, he invited some Facebook friends to join him for a viewing of Michael Bay’s 13 Hours at a local theater. This was the second week after the movie’s release. He stated that we should all arrive early to be sure we got tickets.

I followed his instructions and arrived at the specified time. Not seeing him outside the theater, I bought my ticket so I could get out of the rain and inside the theater to see if he was already there. Again, I did not see him in the lobby, so I got a medium popcorn and drink and went to the appropriate theater. Again, I did not see him. I found a seat and waited.

After about 15 minutes of previews for TV shows I probably will never watch, I sent him a text. His reply was that they were about 8 minutes away.

Ten minutes later, they finally arrived. He said, “I’m sorry we’re late”.

My response was, “Isn’t that the whole point of the movie? You Air Force guys being late?”

Cartoon Network: Leaven in Your Living Room

It is the belief of some fringe protestant group—possible the Amish—that claim that “Satan travels true wires” so if you don’t have electricity, he can’t target you. I’m starting to think they might have a point.

Earlier this week I was reading articles on Blastr.com. I often visit this website to see what movies are in the works; one article caught my eye.
Cartoon Network UK censoring Steven Universe’s sexuality misses the entire point of the show

Until recently, I would not be interested in what is happening in the U.K. but since Obama took office, I have found England’s U.S. news coverage more comprehensive than I usually get from American journalists. The media here is so in love with our dictator-in-chief that they are rarely objective. Often they either praise his rule by Executive Order or just ignore what he is doing—whichever they think will further his administration more.

When a website dedicated to the genre of science fiction entertainment is talking about Cartoon Network, censorship in England, and sexuality; clearly something is amiss.

Before I get into this article I want you to understand who owns and operates this website. This website is run by the SyFy Channel. SyFy is owned by NBC-Universal which is owned by Comcast. This is not some fringe place on the internet. No, this website is part of one of the largest entertainment companies in the world.

The article is an opinion piece that defends a particular cartoon and castigates the censorship by English broadcasters. The edit being complained about is rather mild in my opinion. What shocked me most was the high praise of Steven Universe for being the most openly gay cartoon ever made. Steven is gay; not just the side-kick or some peripheral character.

Steven Universe is gaaaaaaaay. It is easily the gayest kids’ cartoon in the history of western animation. And we’re not just talking about subtext, either. While Steven Universe may be innocent and cutesy, there’s no denying certain facts:

– Garnet is a gem fusion that resulted from Sapphire and Ruby being in romantic love

– Pearl is in love with Rose Quartz (as confirmed by the show’s creators), often to the detriment of her own self worth

– Amethyst shape-shifts into all sorts of forms, many of them male-presenting

– Steven and Connie have fuzed to form a genderqueer person, Stevonnie, who is, let’s be real, attracted and attractive to both men and women

– Background characters often feature same-sex couples

In short, Steven Universe is a rainbow show, kids. And everyone loves it for that.

Well, almost everyone …

I’m like dang! I had no idea that there was such a thing. To me this cartoon is totally out of bounds. I know that most programming on Cartoon Network is not Thomas and Friends but really! This is propaganda and recruiting in its most blatant form.

The fact that this is shown on Cartoon Network means to me that it will fly under the radar of most parents. When I think Boomerang or Cartoon Network I think of children’s programming and I likely wouldn’t give much thought to the title Steven Universe. I thought it was Jimmie Neutron for the next generation.

It’s hard to have worse programming than the pre-teen crap on the Disney Channel but apparently NBC found a way. Too bad they can’t keep homosexuals confined to their Bravo channel.

This also means Steven Universe will eventually find its way to streaming services like Netflix and Hulu. Parents, it might be a simplification that Satan travels true wires but he certainly is trying really hard to get through your television to desensitized your children to evil.

This is another reason to “cut the cord”.

Cutting the Cable in 2016

2016 began with my efforts to stop more fiscal bleeding so I can add more fuel to the Dave Ramsey “snowball”.

On New Year’s Day, we cancelled our subscription to DirecTV. I had been a customer of DirecTV for about ten years.

Back in 2006, I traded in our miserable service from Comcast. Comcast’s Internet and HD television we just crappy. Dial-up was faster on evenings and weekends than anything offered by Comcast. Their HD could be beaten by “rabbit ears” any day.

Unfortunately I live on the “old side” of Elk Grove where there is no fiber-optic cable or competition. Thus we looked at Dish and DirecTV. The deciding factor of which satellite product to go with literally came down to one TV show. My three year old liked Thomas the Tank Engine and Dish didn’t carry the station and DirecTV did so we went with them.

In contrast to Comcast, DirecTV had great service and a superior television experience. However, the bill kept inching upward. Two years ago, we dropped one television from our bill. We went from three to two TVs. I think we did that in November or December of 2014. We also went to a lesser programming package. Then in January, DirecTV raised their rates. After all was said and done, our DirecTV bill was about two dollars cheaper than having a higher programming package and an additional TV.

We have been subscribing to Amazon Prime and Netflix anyway so I decided to bite the bullet and “cut the cord”. The only thing we immediately miss is HGTV. They have no streaming subscription package and you can’t get much from their website. Yeah I know you can get them on Sling TV but you can’t DVR the programs or watch them when you want. Besides, we just added Hulu and the idea is to save money not reallocate it.

We bought a TiVo Bolt and a drone unit for the bedroom. Only after buying it did we learn that Hulu is not available thru the Bolt. As best as I can piece together, the app for the Bolt needs to be written in HTML 5 but previous TiVo products used Flash Player to power their app. TiVo has yet to get their Hulu app working on the Bolt. I called TiVo a few days ago and was assured that the Hulu app would be deployed to users in the next few days; I have yet to see it.
Update: After posting this blog, I checked again and found that the Hulu app is now available on my TiVo Bolt

Anyway, here is the quick and dirty economic analysis. DirecTV costs $109 per month less Hulu subscription of $12 yields a net savings of $97 per month. ($1,164 per year)

Oh the TiVo Bolt was $299 at BestBuy but was on sale for $289 and when we paid for it, for some reason we were given a $50 BestBuy card. We used the card to buy the $149 drone unit so we got both for about $400. The Bolt will support 4K displays and record up to four programs at once off the HD antenna.

In April, we get to kick Verizon to the curb. We will finish switching to Cricket. This will cut our monthly cell phone bill about $140 dollars compared to what I’m paying right now for two phones on “Big Red”. Oh, I think we will at least double our data when we switch.

Review: Childhood’s End

This week I watched the three part presentation of Childhood’s End on the SyFy channel. The program looked interesting. It was a modern take on the 1953 story by Arthur C Clarke. I have not read the book by Clarke but I did read the summary on Wikipedia.org just to get a feel for what the story was about.

During the six hour program, there were some iconic scenes in this drama that I have seen in other movies. It appears that Clarke was influential on others. The spaceships arriving over the large cities of the world seemed like a redo of Independence Day or the TV show V. Part 3 had some portions that reminded me of the last part of 2001—a much later novel by Clarke. Some parts were like the movie portrayal of Carl Sagan’s Contact. Some of the Midwestern farm scenes were similar to Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar. One scene with the farm house was reminiscent of Poltergeist. I also thought of Hellboy and the video game series Diablo for a couple of reasons.

These other movies all came between the novel publication and the miniseries of Childhood’s End. Who properly deserves credit for copying whom is probably debatable. The photography and visual effects were really good for something produced by this NBC owned cable network.

The story was tweaked to fit a 21st century setting as opposed to one at the height of the Cold War and prior to the “Space Race”. The story was about aliens coming to our world to end, war, poverty, and disease. They established a utopia for man’s existence. Had the story gone a different direction at this point, it could have become the famous Twilight Zone episode To Serve Man.

The story goes that the utopia or “golden age of man” not only ended war, poverty, and disease but all organized religion as well. In fact, part 2 of the miniseries opens to a cover of John Lenin’s song Imagine. The world created by the alien race was a verbatim fulfillment of the song.

So who were the aliens that brought all this about? I was expecting E.T. , or some guy in green make-up, but no; in the last five seconds of part 1, we get to see the Overlord, Karellen. Karellen is an alien that is a dead-ringer for ol’ scratch himself. I’ll let Steve Taylor describe him:

When the wind came hissing through the vents,
And I felt my sneakers growing tense
My forehead broke in a cold, cold sweat
In the rearview was a silhouette
Then I heard the doorlocks take a dive
And a whisper screamed “Don’t turn around, just drive”

Scratch! Dressed in red—pointy tail and horn-rimmed head
And a widow’s peak like Eddie Munster

From Drive, He Said 1985

Yeah, the aliens looked like Diablo or Hellboy without big muscles.

Clarke did this on purpose. Not only did he have to do away with organized religion but he had to do it in a way that directly tries to confront Christianity. Here are some things that came to my mind as I think about the program.

• Satan and those that look like him are the good guys.
“Five decades after their arrival the Overlords reveal their appearance, resembling the traditional Christian folk images of demons: large bipeds with cloven hooves, leathery wings, horns, and tails.” –Wikipedia
Satan doesn’t look like Scratch but appears as an angel of light. The time frame in the TV show was less than the fifty years in the novel.

• What we know as manifestations of demon possession are really demonstrations of psychic power
The Bible teaches that demon possession happens, whether it is common or exceptional is a matter of some debate amongst Christians. Scripture has no warrant for telekinesis or psychic powers.

• Ouija boards are good
People with psychic powers use Ouiji board to find the homeworld of the Overlords.
In the Bible, seeking knowledge from the spirit world is forbidden. We are to rely solely on God.

• All humans are rendered incapable of having children
Children are a gift from God and part of the mandate to take dominion over the Earth. Infertility is not normal. A closed womb can be a sign of divine judgement.

• Children are mutated (or evolved) into higher beings
Man will never change or evolve; our technology may change but only the Gospel of Jesus Christ can transform mankind.

• God is the creation or a least the consciousness of it
“Karellen reveals the Overlords’ purpose; they serve the Overmind, a vast cosmic intelligence, born of amalgamated ancient civilizations, and freed from the limitations of material existence.” –Wikipedia
This contrasts with the Biblical teaching that God is separate from the creation but interacts and sustains it.

• The portrayal of Christians on the show is of deluded souls who deny reality.
The false dilemma of faith being not only at odds with science but in direct opposition to it is perpetrated. Christians believe that God made the material world and that because God is a God of order and perfection that the creation is in fact knowable. Christianity is the basis of science not its adversary. The universe is not random chance, probability, and time. Such a world would be unfathomable.

• Clarke’s metaphysics are nonsense and not internally consistent.
Since Childhood’s End is an earlier work than 2001, the portion of the miniseries dealing with the death of a main character is less of an LSD trip than the Star Child junk at the end of 2001. In Childhood’s End, it’s a cross between that scene and John de Lancie’s Q running amok on the holodeck in TNG.

Clarke wants an afterlife but without God. It’s appointed for man to die and after death to face judgement, but it’s a prospect that Clarke tried to avoid.

Childhood’s End is more like Clarke’s childhood tantrum.

We believe that the world was created, has a purpose, and will end someday. Some Christians believe we are living near the end times while others say we are still in the age of the early church. I know some that say we will go to the stars and populate other worlds. They see no contradiction with such an idea. My friend David Chilton was one who held this position.

Science fiction does not have to be hostile to organized religion. Babylon Five is a great example of such a futuristic place. Clarke, Sagan and others want to abolish it. Gene Roddenberry was another. He got very upset when he learned Christians embraced much of his vision of the future. In fact, one episode of the original Star Trek was devoted to Christianity but it has rarely ever aired in syndication. The episode is of a parallel Earth where it took two thousand years for Christianity to finally overcome the Roman Empire.

Childhood’s End starts with much promise but implodes completely before the end of the second part. The final installment becomes laborious to watch. The most interesting part was the man that travels to the Overlord’s homeworld. Their home looks suspiciously like Hell, complete with fire and brimstone. Unfortunately, all we get is a brief glance of the planet followed by some more metaphysical nonsense and the poor guy is whisked off to a dead Earth.

Left Behind: A Christian Argument for Abortion?

Last night, we watched the 2014 version of “Left Behind” featuring Nicholas Cage. Cage makes no pretense of being a believer but some folks in his family are working on him. These family members are also involved in film and talked him into being in the movie. Cage takes many roles that would be risky for other actors. I commend him for taking the risk. Ghost Rider to Left Behind covers a lot of ground.

In the movie, Cage is an airline pilot on a transcontinental flight from New York to London. About halfway thru the flight, the secret rapture of Christians takes place.

At this point in the film, I stopped it and said to my ten year old son that all the babies will be taken too. Sure enough, when I hit play, viewers learned that along with the Christians some “other sheep” were also taken. I tried to explain that not just the Christian children but all the Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and all the rest were gone too. Per the movie, no children were left on the planet.

I have a real problem with the theology in this film. Both Premillennialism and Dispensationalism have no Biblical warrant and when married together, it results in some crazy theology. I explained to my son that the reason the children were taken is because in Baptist Theology, they have a doctrine called the Age of Accountability.

Instead of baptizing their children, Baptists—and like-minded Protestant folks—have a baby dedication ceremony. They believe until children are old enough to truly understand right from wrong, that they can never choose to believer or reject Christ, therefore they are innocent until reaching this “Age of Accountability”. Oh, this age is arbitrary for each child; for some seven, others ten, and if they are handicapped, maybe never.

So who should I believe? Paul the Apostle or Tim LaHaye, Billy Graham, and the good folks at Dallas Theological Seminary? Baptists are logically inconsistent on this point.

Do they believe the Scriptures when it says?
• “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”.
• “For all we like sheep have gone astray.”
• “There is none righteous, no not one.”
And other such verses.

Baptists try to simultaneously affirm both positions. Sorry but the Bible knows of no doctrine of the Age of Accountability. The Scripture is clear that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, the Life; no one comes to the Father except by Him.

If all children can go to heaven without going thru Christ—because they are innocent of sin—then why let them grow older and have a possibility of rejecting Christ? Kill them now and insure they do go to Heaven.

I can’t take credit for pointing this problem out but I sure got smacked with it in a very real world way. Here is how it happened.

Back in the day, I used to hang-out with folks involved in a prolife movement called “Operation Rescue.” I met some good people involved in this organization and learned a lot about my faith during this period of my life.

One activity that I went to was a “baby shower” at Gibson Ranch. It just so happened that the local Planned Parenthood group (or other like-minded abortion provider in the area) was having their company picnic at a nearby spot. We all grabbed signs and went over by their activity and began to protest. Seeing our challenge, the people at the picnic came over and exchanged words with us.

One lady and I had an actual discussion in the midst of this. She asked me why I was prolife to which I responded that I wanted to stop babies from being killed. She then asked me if I believed that the aborted babies went to heaven, to which I responded “yes”. Her next inquiry was the very point that I raise in this blog, if these same children were allowed to be born then at least some would grow-up to reject Christ and thus end-up in Hell. Her conclusion was that by aborting the children she was doing them the service of insuring their eternal destiny. I was unprepared to respond to this logic. About all I could say was killing was wrong. It was weak. I had lost.

Thankfully, shortly after this experience, I began a paradigm shift towards Reformed Theology and Postmillennialism. Parting with the Age of Accountability doctrine and embracing a Covenantal understanding of the faith addressed the shortcomings and contradictions that were so painfully illustrated to me by an abortion provider many years ago.

Watching the key moment of Left Behind brought to mind that whole incident. It’s Jesus or Universalism not some crazy cosmic hybrid of both.