view on this star wars related article.

[Sammy-San]

Why I don’t care about the new Star Wars film

We must resist the glamor of war- especially when it appears benign- and we must creatively challenge ourselves to glamorize Peace instead. What we really need, rather than another Star Wars film, is an equally compelling act of imagination that reframes peaceful co-existence as the exciting narrative for our collective future. Because the truth is that Peace IS exciting. It’s exciting to live a life of adventure exploring a beautiful planet (or new planets) with friends. It’s exciting to be part of the grand collective effort of restoring our biosphere and creating a truly sustainable and fair society. It’s exciting to dream big and to imagine exploring the reaches of our almost infinite galaxy.

But War is not exciting. It is drudgery, terror, and pain and we should leave it behind us as we leave the plastic toys of childhood behind us. We do not need lightsabers and deathstars where we are going. We have outgrown War and deserve better.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Has the writer ever heard of Star Trek? It mostly celebrates peace and so forth...

 

[RDKirk]

Has the writer ever heard of Star Trek? It mostly celebrates peace and so forth...

Umm, no, there's not a single Star Trek episode without conflict, and not many where someone isn't killed.

 

[Sammy-San]

Umm, no, there's not a single Star Trek episode without conflict, and not many where someone isn't killed.

don't judge a book by its cover.

 

[DennisTate]

Has the writer ever heard of Star Trek? It mostly celebrates peace and so forth...

This theory might be of some encouragement to the writer of the article.........
and this verse from Isaiah......

Isaiah 9:7

"Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this."

Does Darth Vader = Azazel = Zeus???


To my thinking the addition of the name "Azazel" to Leviticus 16:10
in the original Hebrew implies something extremely important about the ushering in of the
Era of Moshiach / Messiah in the latter days..........
(after 6000 years of history since Adam and Eve).

Correction...... Azazel was not merely a fallen angel or cherub......
he was a son of G-d and King of the Watchers!

Does a major fallen angel return to G-d and divide the kingdom of Satan and...

cause it to fall?

"but the goat on which the lot fell for Aza'zel shall be presented alive before the LORD to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Aza'zel."(Leviticus 16:10 RSV)

In a nutshell I have came to strongly suspect that Azazel is the fallen angel who will be somewhat like General Abner who brought the ten tribes over to King David or to Rav Shaul/Paul who repented of persecuting Christians and followers of God.

I suspect that when the fallen angel Azazel returns to the God of Abraham with his whole heart...when Yom Kippur is completely fulfilled....then a major step will have been taken toward the ushering in of a truly new era of worldwide peace where even the eating habits of wild animals like lions will be altered!

"And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?"
(Matthew 12)

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Umm, no, there's not a single Star Trek episode without conflict, and not many where someone isn't killed.

Certainly. Many Red Shirts have graves on many worlds. The overarching idea though, is that peace is desirable and the characters are trying to actively work for that goal. The whole point of multiple plots is the attempt to broker peace, such as the Undiscovered Country or multiple episodes of Next Generation. Star Trek has war, as how else would a storyline be forwarded, but it always stresses a sort of Utopian dream of being better and living in harmony.

I say this not as a Trekkie, but as the brother of one, who with my exposure to the franchise, was struck by this consistently positive theme.

 

[RDKirk]

Certainly. Many Red Shirts have graves on many worlds. The overarching idea though, is that peace is desirable and the characters are trying to actively work for that goal. The whole point of multiple plots is the attempt to broker peace, such as the Undiscovered Country or multiple episodes of Next Generation. Star Trek has war, as how else would a storyline be forwarded, but it always stresses a sort of Utopian dream of being better and living in harmony.

I say this not as a Trekkie, but as the brother of one, who with my exposure to the franchise, was struck by this consistently positive theme.

That is within the theme of Star Wars as well, as it is in most literature. The point of the conflict in the most enduring literature is to achieve or re-establish peace.

But the actual stories that Star Trek tells is not what the OP's link asserts:

Because the truth is that Peace IS exciting. It’s exciting to live a life of adventure exploring a beautiful planet (or new planets) with friends. It’s exciting to be part of the grand collective effort of restoring our biosphere and creating a truly sustainable and fair society. It’s exciting to dream big and to imagine exploring the reaches of our almost infinite galaxy.

There is no Star Trek episode that is nothing but 45 minutes of "exploring a beautiful planet with friends."

That would be a great life, but it doesn't make great fiction.

 

[RDKirk]

don't judge a book by its cover.

That's actually a silly saying because that's what book covers are for.

Stroll through your local Barnes & Noble or some other book stores. Every book cover is designed to entice you to purchase it.

 

[Dawnhammer]

Actually the link on the article for the original story was much better.

http://upriser.com/posts/you-grow-u...e-you-ve-become-a-stormtrooper-for-the-empire

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

That is within the theme of Star Wars as well, as it is in most literature. The point of the conflict in the most enduring literature is to achieve or re-establish peace.

But the actual stories that Star Trek tells is not what the OP's link asserts:



There is no Star Trek episode that is nothing but 45 minutes of "exploring a beautiful planet with friends."

That would be a great life, but it doesn't make great fiction.

I perceive Star Wars as a bildungsroman of first Luke Skywalker in IV-VI and then Anakin in I-III. A subset thereof is the heroic archetype, the Monomyth, with strong mythological themes. The primary arc is personal, and often driven by character goals set against a larger conflict. That it has peace as an happy ending, is not the theme of the movies. Star Trek often seems to put Peace or its attempt, front and centre as the primary story - most clearly in Undiscovered Country.

Anyway, many Star Trek episodes boil down to wandering around with friends, a little conflict with a transporter accident and what-not, and everyone sitting down together to sing kumbaya at the end. I wish there was more war in it, those are the most palatable episodes.

 

[Sammy-San]

I perceive Star Wars as a bildungsroman of first Luke Skywalker in IV-VI and then Anakin in I-III. A subset thereof is the heroic archetype, the Monomyth, with strong mythological themes. The primary arc is personal, and often driven by character goals set against a larger conflict. That it has peace as an happy ending, is not the theme of the movies. Star Trek often seems to put Peace or its attempt, front and centre as the primary story - most clearly in Undiscovered Country.

Anyway, many Star Trek episodes boil down to wandering around with friends, a little conflict with a transporter accident and what-not, and everyone sitting down together to sing kumbaya at the end. I wish there was more war in it, those are the most palatable episodes.

 

[Sammy-San]

Umm, no, there's not a single Star Trek episode without conflict, and not many where someone isn't killed.

why do christians talk of how harry potter is demonic but are okay with something like star wars?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Why I don’t care about the new Star Wars film

On a political level, I'd say that Star Wars is meant to reflect the time-honored notion of democratic revolution (and occasional rebellion) against what are seen as Tyrants, such as did the early American Colonies when pressured by King George.

On a mere spiritual leve, we might take Star Wars as a metaphor for froms of Spiritual Warfare, although admittedly, it wouldn't be precisely the Christian form.

Like many people, I've loved the Star Wars franchise ever since I was an 8 years old kid. However, upon becoming a Christian, I've learned to discern the philosophical and social influences which feed into the ideology of filmmakers like George Lucas, and I realize that while I like the action and intrigue of Star Wars movies, or others like them, I also need to think twice, and even think biblically, about the way in which social and spiritual issues are fully handled in the real world.

 

[Sammy-San]

On a political level, I'd say that Star Wars is meant to reflect the time-honored notion of democratic revolution (and occasional rebellion) against what are seen as Tyrants, such as did the early American Colonies when pressured by King George.

On a mere spiritual leve, we might take Star Wars as a metaphor for froms of Spiritual Warfare, although admittedly, it wouldn't be precisely the Christian form.

Like many people, I've loved the Star Wars franchise ever since I was an 8 years old kid. However, upon becoming a Christian, I've learned to discern the philosophical and social influences which feed into the ideology of filmmakers like George Lucas, and I realize that while I like the action and intrigue of Star Wars movies, or others like them, I also need to think twice, and even think biblically, about the way in which social and spiritual issues are fully handled in the real world.

What do you mean, like romanticizing war?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

What do you mean, like romanticizing war?

Yes, like romanticizing war in a Star Wars style.

 

[Sammy-San]

Yes, like romanticizing war in a Star Wars style.

star wars style?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Empire Strikes back shows the darker side of the battle against the Empire as does Revenge of the Sith after the whole order 66 thing. It's mistaken to read the films glamorising war when the message is more or less to fight for what is right, freedom of a republic vs the oppression of an empire. It's more character story than any sort of serious war drama, the war is simply a context for these much larger narratives (Luke finding his place and destiny) to take place in.

I disagree with the author of this article's line that war can't be exciting. War is conflict which raises adrenaline which deliberately impacts us feeling the excitement, the rush when we vicariously see people fight or participate in. War makes for good subject matter in much of media and I don't see why it is particularly objectionable to use it as a setting or depict it in less gritty way than say how Dunkirk depicted it. Incidentally that movie was dark, gritty, tragic and exciting all at the same time.

 

[Sammy-San]

Empire Strikes back shows the darker side of the battle against the Empire as does Revenge of the Sith after the whole order 66 thing. It's mistaken to read the films glamorising war when the message is more or less to fight for what is right, freedom of a republic vs the oppression of an empire. It's more character story than any sort of serious war drama, the war is simply a context for these much larger narratives (Luke finding his place and destiny) to take place in.

I disagree with the author of this article's line that war can't be exciting. War is conflict which raises adrenaline which deliberately impacts us feeling the excitement, the rush when we vicariously see people fight or participate in. War makes for good subject matter in much of media and I don't see why it is particularly objectionable to use it as a setting or depict it in less gritty way than say how Dunkirk depicted it. Incidentally that movie was dark, gritty, tragic and exciting all at the same time.

There aren't other contexts to put it in?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

There aren't other contexts to put it in?

There are but star wars would not have been nearly as memorable or good.

Would you make the same criticism of Narnia perchance?

 

[Sammy-San]

There are but star wars would not have been nearly as memorable or good.

Would you make the same criticism of Narnia perchance?

So the article is overthinking things?

If you ignore the title other stories aren't much different.