Angels & Demons & Controversy

Its unfortunate that the early Roman church tried to suppress scientific discoveries, geocentric vs. heliocentric, etc. and it still supplies fuel for such book/movie plots.

But entertainment is entertainment, and the worst thing you can do is try to map the entertainment over to actual truth, whether science, theology or otherwise.

For truth, study the theology of the church. Study the debates. See if a scientist can make a big-bang seem credible when pitted up against an orthodox Christian theologian. Regardless of the era or the spokesperson, you’ll always find the requirement for a first-cause of all things that have been created. An uncaused cause, which must be a personal being, since it created creatures that have qualities of personal “being-ness.” (so to speak).

Then you have to grapple with the philosophical questions about whether life is somehow meaningful, or just temporary and random. Eventually you have to decide whether you believe there is ultimate justice, which would require an omniscient, omnipotent being to do the judging, so that the injustices we see in the world could ultimately be made right. Otherwise you’re left with only the temporary, the nihilism of Neitzche.

Christianity is a word that nowadays applies to a whole laundry list of different groups and beliefs, but you can reduce it lot by saying “classical Christianity” or something like that, meaning the beliefs that were mainstream in the Christian world before the “Age of Enlightenment”, etc. when scientists began to postulate that since the science was so “cool”, maybe God was not required to make it all work.

Classical Christianity is where a lot of the deep theological writing took place, when theologians weren’t just trying to sell books, but actually were zealous to clarify what we can know about God from both the Bible and the natural world. There are some who still teach (and sell) those classical ideas nowadays. You can get systematic theology in MP3 format now!

I like R.C. Sproul as my favorite contemporary theologian, but thats just me.

I fear that some of the things that you’re perceiving as ill-conceived ignorance, might be selling God short.
Just because people have made major mistakes while claiming to be Christians, don’t imagine that God and truth don’t matter. Some things are worth arguing about, especially when you see people accepting scientific theories that defy simple logic and sometimes annihilate basic scientific laws like cause/effect, and the law of non-contradiction.

Scientists often make huge unfounded leaps and claims, and sometimes its just to sell books, or make a name, or defend a theory that is precious to them, whether reason-able or not.

FYI, I’m not aware of whatever controversy you were referring to, but I can certainly imagine. And when I said “some things are worth arguing about”, I really just meant that for emphasis I guess.

I don’t think “arguing” really helps any situation. I only responded because of the way you ended your post:

>>>>Sometimes I lose faith in humanity–religious and non-religious alike.

..it sounded so depressed.

It might be possible to take my response as from someone who wants to argue or debate, but its really not. It just what I happened to be thinking after your depressing conclusion.

But since I’ve been listening to theology MP3’s lately, I just had to say something!

When I used the phrase “ill-conceived ignorance” I was not referring to God, but to the people that are always trying to make mountains out of mole-hills — the people who would rather oppose a movie they THINK is against their beliefs than actually do the simplest bit of homework and realize how wrong they are.

Personally I am not religious (though nor am I an Atheist), I simply have HUGE problems with modern day religions. For one thing, Evolution, which for all intents and purposes is scientific FACT, is seen as nothing short of ludicrous by many churches (I was raised Southern Baptist, so you can imagine). I do hope to live in a world one day when people aren’t so damn myopic, but I doubt it’ll be in my lifetime. Not one Southern Baptist I have ever met understands that there are people all over the world who believe just as strongly in their own religion as they do themselves — and moreover, they have JUST AS MUCH proof of their beliefs as any other religion. And I suppose that’s another thing: Christians nowadays are slowly loosing the line of understanding between Faith and Fact.

You mentioned in the very beginning of how unfortunate it was for the Roman Church to cover up so many scientific facts back in the day. You’re right. From the very beginning, Dan Brown maintained while much of the history is true, all of the story is very much fiction. People accuse the guy of making accusations towards the Church when he never did anything more than write a half-decent thriller novel. And I believe it was Leigh Teabing’s character right when we first meet him in The Da Vinci Code that explained that none of what they said was big news to true Christians anyways, because they were already aware of the history of their religion. The only thing people did when they started flinging their curses towards Brown was show just how ignorant they were of their own beliefs.

Ha, yeah I kinda got that you really weren’t out to argue — if you were, you’d have been all “fire and brimstone” with me. I wrote this short blog to blow off a little steam after reading about the on-going feud between Ron Howard and the Vatican — Howard is a talented filmmaker to me, and the guys been in the business long enough that he doesn’t have to make films simply for the paycheck, which is what he’s being accused of currently.

Whats funny is I actually corrected that sentence about selling God short, but I did it in Notepad, AFTER I had already pasted my response on the web page. It was a long post, so I was working in Notepad, because you never know….I don’t know whether there was anything else I changed that you didnt get. LOL.

Well, Christ did make the exclusive claims, as you know if you were raised in SB church. And almost everyone does have strong beliefs in the religions of their culture. So there is definite conflict. Hopefully Christians will present those claims in a manner consistent with how Christ himself did it…with compassion.

That is usually what is lacking. Christ said He came to bring the truth, and that he only was teaching that which the Father gave him to teach. But he did everything with great compassion! Everything that is except for dealing with hypocrisy. Wherever he encountered the self-righteous, the hypocrisy, the lack of human compassion, he denounced them (and the horse they rode in on).

I just ran across your blog tonight. I usually only read the tech articles on LG/The Blade. But you have some interesting stuff, so I’ll probably be around.

I agree with you on Terminator SCC. I’m hearing its gone, and its killing me!

Take care.

Writings from John Paul II state the same frustration with church leaders in the past to simply dismiss and condemn scientific theories and discoveries. He stated that many of these discoveries are undeniable in evidence of the nature around us. He states that theology and science each have their own realm of influence on man’s awareness. Being that both are developments of gifts provided by God to mankind they are both Truth and cannot contradict one and other in the fullness of understanding of this Truth.

That evolution occurs in nature is truth, certain species have evidence of changing and adapting. There are numerous theories how this occurs each with incomplete evidence to call them a proof. What JP II states is that because we cannot see how something occurs does not mean that we can simply disregard the evidence of its existence. We do not fully understand how electricity works or how gravity works, but we have proof that these do indeed exist and can have repeated results that we can trust. So we use them.

JP II simply states that the church nor science can deny the existence of evidence just because it doesn’t fit their personal agenda. Each must recognize that science cannot simply disregard that which it cannot measure and theology cannot simply disregard that which is measured that doesn’t fit their “vision” of things. What must occur if each truly seeks Truth and Understanding in the purest form all must be taken into consideration. I believe the “Big Bang” theory could indeed have occurred, my hypothesis is God said “Let there be Light!” and bang it happened!

mhz, you have no idea! Ever since TSCC ended with its season 2 finale, which had far and away one of the most brilliant endings I’ve ever seen, I have literally been all of the web trying to find ANYTHING that could fill me in on the fate of the show — I’ve even added Josh Friedman on Twitter (Josh_Friedman if you’re wondering). All I can do now is just bite nails and sit nervously as I wait for Fox to announce their new schedules… yeesh.

Oh, and thanks for checking out the blogs!

Why is the idea that Jesus was human any more ludicrous than the other explanation?

Just curious.

I find Dan Brown a gifted author. It’s not often I am riveted to a book these days.

He probably means the “ludicrous” comment from a standpoint that it would be ludicrous for the global Christian church to exist, following after the writings of the apostles of Jesus Christ, if he were merely a regular human.

Although what EXACTLY he meant he would have to answer for himself.

I don’t feel threatened at all by either of these films.
The Holy Spirit is far more powerful than any anti-christ could ever be. It won’t matter what lies are told as those who are going to be saved will be saved, by the Power of God.
The Lord Jesus Christ is God, he always has been and always will be. He is the Creator of all thing’s. The Holy Bible is God’s Word and is full of light and truth, Dan Brown’s books are full of darkness and lies. If a person really wants to know the truth, if they really want to find God, then he will reveal himself to them and no amount of fiction will get in his way.
As for the roman catholic church, it is a cult and I would advise anyone in it to leave and trust in Christ alone for the salvation of their soul.
” Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved” Acts 16:31.

See, it posts like that where this neverending b.s. starts. I’ll say it again: Dan Brown is a Christian. He writes books like The Da Vinci Code and Angels & Demons because AS A Christian, and a naturally curious human being, these are the kind of stories he is interested in writing. More than anything else, though, he loves to write about a good conspiracy. If you knew anything about his other works, you’d know this — Deception Point and Digital Fortress were both high concept books with conspiracies galore (and absolutely nothing to do with religion, BTW). As a thriller writer, he knows that that makes for solid titilation. But before I go any further with sounding like I am a HUGE fan of his writing, I must stop and profess that I believe his work is only so-so. Don’t get me wrong, the guy can keep you on the edge of your sit like it is nobody’s business, but his overall character development and plot devices are often shallow and repetitive (Harlan Coben is a far better thriller writer).

And ALL OF THAT being said, please do not throw Bible verses at me, ma’am. And please do not give me such generic lines such as “The Holy Bible is God’s Word and is full of light an truth” — that’s fortune cookie logic, and I’ll simply refer you to the following verses that, as a true follower of God’s “Word,” you SHOULD be following:

1) Exodus 21:7 basically explains that is alright for a man to sell his daughter into slavery.

2) Leviticus 25:44 explains that owning slaves isn’t wrong as long as they are people from different countries.

3) Exodus 35:2 states that any man working on the day of the Sabbath MUST be put to death.

4) Leviticus 11:10 explains that eating shellfish is an abomination.

5) Also in Leviticus, 19:27, is states that you may not cut the hair on the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.

So being the big God/Bible follower that you are — one that does not PICK AND CHOOSE the verses to live by, I take it? — I believe it is only best, to prove yourself worthy of His grace, that you must own slaves, not eat shellfish, never trim your hair and, above all, KILL anyone you find working on the Sabbath.

Good luck.

If Dan Brown were a Christian, he would love the Lord Jesus Christ and he quite clearly does not.
I’m sorry, but the verses you have quoted show that you do not have any understanding of the Scriptures, I’m not saying that to put you down, I’m just telling the truth.
If I were to to follow what you have quoted, I would need to be Jewish and living over 2000 years ago.
Dan Brown is anti-christ, what he has written is an abomination, but he can repent and turn to Christ before it is too late for him and so can you.

”repent ye, and believe the gospel.” Mark 1:15.

Amen Rachel! Nuff said…

hey mhz -

being a ligonier partner, as am I, I’m curious as to why you dont stand closer to the side of truth and rather seem to (a) ignore everything said by the author of this blog that totally contradicts scripture or (b) be in agreement with the falsehood.

Can you answer that?

Well, okay. And so nice to meet you too.

Landen, I am sorry that I now have to (briefly) talk about you as if you weren’t here.

The author (Landen is his name!) expressed clearly that he is not interested in being preached to.

Not only that, but he prefers that his blog does not become a platform for someone else’s preaching. These are things explicitly stated in the text. I was simply attempting to honor his wishes regarding that.

I did print out his comments about the Old Testament Scriptures, because it surprised me, and I CERTAINLY do not agree with the way he used them, and I have (yesterday) spent a few minutes reflecting on why he thinks of the Scripture that way, but I had not decided to challenge him about it.

I think he already understands the position of orthodox Christianity, and disagrees with it. Sometime this morning I thought about posting a remark along the lines of, “that might be the most overly-simplistic view of Old Testament Scripture I have ever seen.” (Sorry there Landen…) But I did not post it, although I have now, simply to defend myself.

Again, the reason was his clearly expressed desire that his blog would not become argument-central among Christians.

mhz, I’m sorry you’ve now been dragged into all of this. I understand that you disagree with some of things I’ve written, but you have no idea how nice it is to meet someone who is not constantly blowing everything I say out of proportion. Regarding the Bible verses I posted, I understand they’re Old Testament and that they’re no longer meant to be taken seriously/literally. I posted them more as a response to all the Bible verses being thrown at me — with them I was hoping to kind of cancel the whole thing out, if that makes sense. I understand that it is simplistic, but I also never intended to try and dissect it, either. To me, all books, including the Bible, are subjective in their interpretations, therefore when people quote scripture at me, I simply return the favor.

BUT, since it is more common for Christians to follow more closely to the New Testament than the Old (for obvious reasons) I find it astounding that so many Christians still believe in the Creation story of the first six days — and take those words literally. I’ve tried asking some of my more Christian friends if they really believe that “story,” and if so, do they then believe that man and dinosaur co-existed? The answer is always something along the lines of: *Shrug* “You gotta have faith.”

SO, unless it is JUST the moronic Southern Baptists I’ve spoken to, it seems that Christians will believe in Old Testament stories such as the story of Creation, AND ALSO Old Testament verses such as those dealing with things such as homosexuality being an abomination, yet the ones dealing with slaves, hair trimming, or working on the Sabbath, are ignored. Maybe it is still simplistic, but that to me clearly reads as “picking and choosing.”

As a side note, Jewish people always seem to have a greater deal of tact when it comes to me asking questions about the Bible. Case in point, when I asked my friend (who is Jewish) about whether she believes in the Creation story, she simply cocked an eyebrow at me and said, “Dude, seriously?” According to her, most of what is written in terms of morals and what have you are told to teach just that, and that they were never written to be taken as literal.

And just so this can remain on topic: Ahem, Dan Brown IS a Christian.

So there.

(And you’re right mhz, this blog was written solely to explain why Angels & Demons is actually more in line with Christian themes than people give it credit for and NOT to a neverending debate over interpretations — though, honestly, I’m not sure why I didn’t see this coming. Moreoever, though, and just as important, the book is a Fiction Thriller. Two very important words.)

Landen, I hope that you will be saved and then you will understand, the way we do. Oh, and you wont go to hell when you die if you are saved, so that’s a big plus.
All born again believers believe that God Created the heavens and the earth and all that are therein, including Adam and Eve, in 6 day’s and rested on the 7th.
There is no point in asking a Jewish person a question about the Bible as they don’t believe the old testament prophecies about the Lord Jesus Christ are talking about him at all and that does at first take faith and as you start to grow as a Christian, the Holy Spirit reveals more and more to you and thing’s become so much clearer and obvious.
It takes the Holy Spirit to show us what the Scriptures mean and if you have not been born again, you do not have the Holy Spirit.
It’s not about picking and choosing what Scriptures to use, but about understanding what they mean and certain Scriptures in the old testament are not for now and some still are, the Holy Spirit will show you, but first you need to be saved.

Yes Dan Brown’s books are fiction, but what starts off that way can have a strange afffect on peoples mind’s and they start believeing that Jesus Christ really was only a man.
Satan loves Dan Brown’s books.
A real, born again, of the Spirit of God, Christian would never, ever tells such terrible stories about the living God, they would fear him and would be appalled at the very thought of some of the thing’s this man has written.
No Christian would dishonour Christ the way Dan Brown has, no way, not ever.
If you are ever saved, you will then understand why Dan Brown is a Christian by name alone. Anyone can call themselves a Christian, but if they do not follow Christ in love for him and that being because he first loved them and died and shed his blood for them, to save them from eternity in the lake of fire, then they are not a Christian in God’s eyes and are still on the path that leads to distuction.

I meant an unbelieving Jewish person, btw.

Technically, I was saved AND Baptized many and many a moon ago.

But then I reached the Age of Reason.

‘Nyuck, ‘nyuck.

Well Landen, I hope you will really get saved and then you can be baptised for real next time.
I’m sure all the Christians that visit this site will be praying for you and yours.

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. John 3:36.

You’re teasing me here dude.

You should either stop poking me (us?) with these comments, or else give me the green light to post some responses.

I’m trying to respect your rules here, but you’re causing me to write up responses that I don’t post, just so I can get them out of my system.

Its not easy to sit still when I read some of these things. Maybe you should give me an email address that you hardly ever check, so I can have a legitimate place to send the stuff I’m writing. You don’t have to read it if you don’t want to. As it is, I already wrote an outline of the 4 challenges that you presented, with preliminary responses to some of them.

I was only here to love Terminator SCC with you at first!

As a side note, I bet you would like the Ligonier series, “Consequences of Ideas.”

Its basically an overview of the history of philosophy, from just pre-Socrates, to 20th century. Of course it covers the Age of Reason.

I wrote up an argument in answer to your statements:

>>>> To me, all books, including the Bible, are subjective in their interpretations
>>>> moreover, they (other religions) have JUST AS MUCH proof of their beliefs as any other religion

Your assumption is:
Any book about a “God” MUST be subjective, since there are so many conflicting views around the world.

I am not going to post it here, unless you want it. Its pretty long for a comment post. If not I’ll just put it on my own blog, (when I get around to working out some HTML that I need to figure out.)

Some of your comments are very provocative, and have caused me to reflect on Scripture a bit. But I will completely respect your original goal of keeping this blog on task.

But I have to say, you’re really throwing the gauntlet sometimes.

mhz, as far as throwing the gauntlet, I believe it was thrown at me first (not by you of course). Mostly everything you’ve read that you term “provacative” is really just my own screwy way of raising my middle finger to anyone that throws scripture at me as if it actually PROVES anything.

But I understand what you’re saying, and hell, I may even pick up that Liongier series one day (I wonder if it is available on Kindle?). And since you’ve been respectable (even when I have not) about holding back with some of your posts, I will go ahead and end it all now — at least on my part. People can continue posting if they want I suppose, but I am officially done.

Switching subjects, though: Brian Austin Green recently did a pretty good interview regarding TSCC on this podcast: http://www.podtrac.com/PodtracPlayer/podtracplayer.aspx?podcast=http://feeds.feedburner.com/skynext-mp3.

And I must ask: Did you enjoy the season 2 finale as much as I did — the last five minutes were some of the best I have ever seen on network television!

I thought the finale was incredibly good as well. I am always glued to the TV when the show is on. I have loved it all the way along, mostly because of the subtleties of it. The finale was good, and somewhat creepy too.

They really have made this series a science fiction mind-bender, and have avoided doing a lot of silly things that Heroes and Lost and other shows with complex plot lines have resorted to.

For instance, on Lost, the “goofy” guy named Hurley sits down and tells one of the other characters something like, “Dude, I’m confused about this time travel thing. Has’nt already happened?” So we have to listen to this other character explain whats going on, which is obviously for the benefit of the audience who needs to catch up.

So cheesy. Heroes was even worse, with constant updates from a NARRATOR. It was embarrassing for the viewer, being spoken to like a child all the time. I had to stop watching it, before this last season started.

TSCC is just cool and subtle. I hope it does not go away.

I kept rewinding the last part, where you hear Sarah’s voice popping through the electrical shocks of the time machine at the very end. It was a haunting ending.

Plus they really threw EVERYTHING up in the air, with the “merging” of Cameron and John Henry, and the CEO lady (forgot the name) going with John. Absolutely creepy and cool.

Yes, that whole bit with Sarah’s voice was genius. It was like the episode was over and NOTHING else needed to be said, and then the writers tossed that in there, and did it in such an interesting way that it made it just all the more a brilliant finale.

And speaking of subtly, I loved how they portrayed Brian Austin Green’s death in the episode prior: no drama, just real.

Next week is when Fox is supposedly announcing its 09-10 season, so fingers crossed.

(Oh, and I personally hope Dollhouse comes back as well — it had a great finale, too.)

Religion is about politics. Ever it has been and ever it will be.

Man is innately perverse–where a paradox does not exist, man will create one. This statement is false.

The movie lost me from the get go. The physics is laughable. The premise is naive.

We are left to ponder the fate of the other two containers. Apparently, CERN still has them and is withholding the information from the world. The Vatican gave up a unique, one of a kind artifact that had been carefully preserved in a low oxygen atmosphere by presenting it in a cigar box? Who’s holding the missing page? I smell a sequel.

“STOP!” DON’T TOUCH THAT CONTAINER!!!

“We need to check it for fingerprints, first.”

Containment of anti-matter would first require a perfect vacuum, somewhat difficult to produce and sustain. The container in the movie does not qualify. The hull breach in the observation lounge of the Enterprise should have alerted you to the fact that the container depicted in the movie really could not qualify for the job. No; I have not mixed my movies.

Achieving a perfect (and immoral) vacuum would be, technologically, somewhat difficult as quantum theory predicts that no volume of space can be perfectly empty. The closest we come to a perfect vacuum is outer (way outer) space which supports a few stray hydrogen atoms (matter) per cubic centimeter. Where’s Waldo?

Make your vote count or someone else will.

The cost of producing any appreciable quantity of anti-matter would put the earth in a permanent economic crisis. The suspension of disbelief requires that I don’t know enough to not disbelieve.

Who was the bad guy’s electrician and how did he get past those Swiss guys?

Anti-matter (as we know it?) does not contain charge, as we know it, and cannot be positioned in space by magnets, as we know them.

We won’t destroy ourselves with bombs; we’ll just confuse ourselves to death.

The movie would have been a bit more interesting if they explained that battery–the one that is supporting the, er, suspension of the anti-matter by magnets AND the LED progression lights.

Spoiler: It’s Die Hard with a Vengence that ends with “liar, liar, pants on fire.”

Bad movie, regardless of your philosophy. Save your money.

i was jus tcommenting to say that i completely agree with all your points in your article and especially with your closing statement.

and then i read through all the bickering in the comments. oh my god! talk about some hardcore preaching. also, talk about some ‘jumping to conclusions’. Dan Brown is anti-Christ? Please. Just because you don’t understand the science and therefore latch onto anything theological that you dont understand or that doesn’t match exactly whats in your bible doesn’t give you right to go jumping to ridiculous conclusions.

i haven’t seen Angels and Demons yet but I probably will because I enjoyed the book. And buffalo, i had no idea about everything you said about antimatter and i’ll happily put aside you enlightening me about it so I can enjoy the movie.

If you want to rip apart the bad science in a movie you SHOULD be talking about the new star trek cause man… i thought i was watching a different movie to the one everyone’s been raving about. red matter? spock’s ship computer warning him as part of the normal ship messages? terrible.