The Lion, the Witch and the Political Correctness

[AdamW]

Apparently the new "The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe" has had any likeness between Aslan the Lion and Jesus Christ toned down/removed. Presumably to avoid offending fat bints in leggings (my past experiences of over-PC-isation have ALWAYS involved fat bints in leggings!)

Yet "The Matrix", with all of its religious imagery, and all those little factlets the fans come up with ("Neo" is an anagram of "One", as in "The One", or Jesus Christ!), I am yet to hear of anyone complaining about that.

Could it be that the Directors of the new Narnia films are just taking pre-emptive measures to avoid being boycotted by the PC-brigade, or are they themselves fully paid-up members of the PC-Union?

Fer chrissakes, Islam holds J-C as a prophet, and afaik most Jews believe J-C was real and a great bloke, even if they don't hold the Christian view of him being the Messiah. And I'm yet to hear of a Hindu who has a problem with people having their own beliefs. So who the heck is going to be offended because Lewis Carrol wrote in a character who is a metaphor for Jesus?

 

[johnny_t]

Jews believe that Jesus was real, and genuinely believed he was the messiah, but was mistaken. Not a bad person, just misguided. Like David Icke.

Cue Monty Python quotes......

EDIT: Actually, in what way is Aslan being made less Jesus-like ? Is the allegory being played down through changing the story, or are they making the lion look less like a 2000 year-old Jew, because, in my experience, they don't look that similar anyway ??

 

[kendor]

the way i look at it is the lion is our own Tony Blair, the witch of course was Maggie Thatcher and the Wardrobe well we can't give out all the secrets yet can we!

seriously though the christian view of who jesus was has greatly been eroded by the loss of so many parts of the bible having been destroyed in the past, the very fact why the new testament only contains 27 books therefore it's not too easy to just put down any of the suggestions that jesus was in fact merely mortal and that he was also not the only prodgeny of his parents.

 

[Slogger]

there is no god there was no jesus dont believe all you read in books written by man > or do you then on that factual basis all you read in the SUN is true oh my

 

[notb665]

Jesus most definitely existed - the issue is whether you believe what he said/what people say he said.


As for the Virgin part of Virgin Mary, old texts have been mistranslated from the word 'barren', meaning infertile.

Hence the conception was a miracle, as infertile couples feel today when they conceive.

 

[Slogger]

hence and thefore thou art takin the provebial pi**

there is no truth in any word that man writes there may be some slight and i mean very slight hint at it but nah dont wont and cant belive the bible and all that boll****

 

[Slogger]

ps wheres your proof that jesus actually existed in the context of errr gods son ( thought we all where )

 

[notb665]

After re-reading and re-reading Slogger's post I think I understand it - I usually have trouble understanding them due to the poor English, bad grammar, bad spelling, no punctuation and the sentiment skewed by misguided aggression, but usually manage.

As for whether Jesus existed or not, and if he said he was God's son, completely unbiased and unattached Roman and Greek scholars have documented it as part of current affairs, 'cus they were there. They often paid no great attention to it, they just documented it. Just like people now produce newspapers and magazines.

Are you taking the pi** of out me because I used the word "Hence"? Sorry about that, I can't help having three university degrees and using big words.

 

[Freddie]

After re-reading and re-reading Slogger's post I think I understand it - I usually have trouble understanding them due to the poor English, bad grammar, bad spelling, no punctuation and the sentiment skewed by misguided agression, but usually manage.

As for whether Jesus existed or not, and if he said he was God's son, completely unbiased and unattached Roman and Greek scholars have documented it as part of current affairs, 'cus they were there. They often paid no great attention to it, they just documented it. Just like people now produce newspapers and magazines.

Are you taking the pi** of out me because I used the word "Hence"? Sorry about that, I can't help having three university degrees and using big words.

I have never seen proof that Jesus excisted , and as for being gods son that title has been claimed by a few and the title of god itself has also been claimed by more than one.

It's all mumbo jumbo superstition!

 

[Slogger]

After re-reading and re-reading Slogger's post I think I understand it - I usually have trouble understanding them due to the poor English, bad grammar, bad spelling, no punctuation and the sentiment skewed by misguided aggression, but usually manage.

As for whether Jesus existed or not, and if he said he was God's son, completely unbiased and unattached Roman and Greek scholars have documented it as part of current affairs, 'cus they were there. They often paid no great attention to it, they just documented it. Just like people now produce newspapers and magazines.

Are you taking the pi** of out me because I used the word "Hence"? Sorry about that, I can't help having three university degrees and using big words.

oh u fu**** english teacher u

 

[notb665]

Well, I have actually studied this subject in great detail, oh yes.

The translation from Aramaic of what Jesus said was "The King of The Jews" was skewed into "Son of God".

There are loads of examples of where slight translation errors can greatly change the subject. Some passages are written in ancient Greek, which has no punctuation, and where you place the comma when you translate it changes the meaning of the sentence entirely. Another example is when Moses parted the Red Sea - hardly a believable parable. What in fact happened was that he crossed a Reed Sea when the tide was out, but when the army behind him arrived at the sea, the tide was in, and they couldn't cross it. And there is evidence behind the seven plagues and all that, why the first born died (because he had the lions share of the food and therefore the most poison). It goes on and on...

 

[AdamW]

The translation from Aramaic of what Jesus said was "The King of The Jews" was skewed into "Son of God".

This one always cracks me up:

"If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me": Governor of Texas, c1920

You have to hope it is apocryphal or taken out of context, but let's just enjoy it

 

[TexMex]

"If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for me": Governor of Texas, c1920

You have to hope it is apocryphal or taken out of context, but let's just enjoy it

Don't spoil it. I just have to believe that is true. Wasn't "Govornor of Texas" a position held by GW at some time past. Obviously they "type cast" for this job.

Anyhow back to the thread.
I can't see a problem with accepting that Jesus was a real person. People are born everyday. Some are also called Jesus. Why would you disbelieve his very existence?

As for his teachings, from what I understand, by and large, Jesus followed the Jewish faith. The one thing that he could not agree with, however, was the concept that all NON jews were damned. The jewish faith regards the jews as the "chosen" people, while the rest of us have no right to expect anything from THIER god.

So basically, Christianity is nothing more than a version of Judaism for the us gentiles. All in all, he was probably a very egalitarian type, following a faith that he, broadly, believed in but at odds when it came to excluding all others.

Personally, I suspect that the Jewish faith itself was direct plagarism of a religion started by Tutankhamuns father (Arkenharten). Many of the psalms (and even our lords prayer) have been found to be direct translations from the "book of the dead", inscribed on the walls of the great pyramids. This religion itself, was more an invention to control the masses than any devine inspiration.

The really strange thing is this pervasive ignorance that muslims find the christian faith offensive. When it comes to religion, Islam is probably the most accommodating of other faiths. One of the fundamental teachings of mohammed is respect for "people of the book". This phrase refers to ANY followers of ANY religion that is based on the teachings of a prophet. Mohammed himself, acknowledged that God had already revealed himself to other prophets (including Jesus), and these prophets were also worthy of respect.

I myself am completely atheist, so I think the whole lot is bunkum, but we owe the existence of our civilisation to religion. Without it, I doubt that anyone would have been able to achieve the level of co-ordination of society for the greater good. Now that we have other devices in place (such as Laws and established levels of acceptable behaviour), I think it's had it's day.

 

[AdamW]

we owe the existence of our civilisation to religion. Without it, I doubt that anyone would have been able to achieve the level of co-ordination of society for the greater good. Now that we have other devices in place (such as Laws and established levels of acceptable behaviour), I think it's had it's day.

I think that's the most anthropological and considered argument against religion I've ever read!

Seriously, in my experience people are either

a) religious
b) say something like "live and let live, religion doesn't bother me, let them do it"
c) start to bark "religion is the cause of all hatred in the world!!!" angrily

 

[WoodYouLike]

I myself am completely atheist, so I think the whole lot is bunkum, but we owe the existence of our civilisation to religion. Without it, I doubt that anyone would have been able to achieve the level of co-ordination of society for the greater good. Now that we have other devices in place (such as Laws and established levels of acceptable behaviour), I think it's had it's day.

TexMex, if you include legends and myths into this I'm more willing to agree with you.
Religion came partly from legends/myths, which were stories to explain the unknown in acient times, creating a 'joined' bases for starting 'civilisation', sharing 'knowledge' and 'feelings' of togetherness
(I'm not explaining this proper, am I)