7 comments on “Planet of the Apes (1968) is a Crusade Against God

  1. Pingback: Planet of the Apes (1968) is a Crusade Against God | Christians Anonymous

  2. Isn’t religion suppose to be closed minded? If we believe that our way is the only way and that everyone else is wrong why would we allow ourselves to be openminded? Isn’t there something in the Bible about guarding your mind and your heart? To be open minded we would have to say that it is possible that we are wrong, and we would never do that because we know without a shadow of a doubt that we are right, and to be open to anything else would show a lack in our faith. Now, because of this close mindedness we are at odds with evolution and the scientific community. Christianity has a long history of stopping progress out of fear, we have silenced, tortured, and even killed scientists that claimed the earth was round or we revolved around the sun. So, yes in many ways we have stalled progress and we are viewed as the enemy by a large part of the scientific community, but to that I say, “so what?”. We should stop trying to say that you can mesh science and religion. God is the only answer and science and scientists that go against God are our enemy!

    • True science, based on observation and experimentation, can be meshed with God, because it shows evidence for Him. Evolution, on the other hand, is not scientifically valid. At best it’s a theory, and there are alternate theories which explain the evidence equally as well (better, in my opinion) which account for the existence of God.

      I’d also say, in response to your comments about being open or closed-minded, that we ought not to take the attitude that we can never be wrong, as we can have misunderstandings of scripture, for example. And more importantly, the truth fears no investigation. At the very least, we should be willing to examine the facts, so religion and truth, in its purest form, does not impede progress.

      • I worry what are they teaching in school these days. A theory is an expanded rationalization of verifiable hypotheses. Evolution is as well proven as say germ theory, and I rarely hear about Christians protesting washing their hands. Literal word-for-word interpretation of the Bible is an 18th century invention (too long to explain, but a Google search will lend results). Catholics do not profess this, and many other non-radical denominations do not profess this.

        “Although we take the Bible literally, there are still figures of speech within its pages. An example of a figure of speech would be that if someone said “it is raining cats and dogs outside,” you would know that they did not really mean that cats and dogs were falling from the sky. They would mean it is raining really hard. There are figures of speech in the Bible which are not to be taken literally, but those are obvious. (See Psalm 17:8 for example.)” Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/

        Fun fact: Gravity is not proven. Despite the “Law of Gravity”, it is not (yet) mathematically proven. Even though a “law” sounds more strict than a theory, a law is simple observation that is real but cannot yet be fully explained. “Matrix Theory” for example is simply a way show how to organize and solve data via a mathematical matrices. Their will never be a debate in math class that matrices are “at best a theory”.

        If you intend to reply, I must implore you cite your sources, as neither of us are (presumably) expert scholars in biology or religion. My Cited Sources: Wikipedia, Got Questions, and Sunday School. Seriously, Wikipedia has a good “theory” write up, you should read it. Also look up “falsifiability”.

  3. This is an interesting in-house discussion (for all to see). I’m not sure if this a devil’s advocate situation going on here. Maybe not, I don’t know.

    Christianity (if that’s what we’re really talking about) isn’t close-minded, Eric. Christianity holds to exclusive truth propositions. It does so because truth is itself exclusive. If something is true then it’s opposite is false. Being close-minded is when someone won’t even countenance another point of view. So when Christians affirm that Jesus is the only way then that automatically means no other way can also be the way. That’s not being close-minded, though; that’s just the way truth works. Likewise, if we disagree with a point of view that runs contrary to biblical teaching (or is just a bad argument), that doesn’t mean we haven’t studied or thought about it. That’s close-mindedness, Eric.

    Also, no one knows without a shadow of a doubt that they are correct. If we had absolute knowledge that Jesus was alive and the propitiation of our sins then there would be no need for faith. My philosophy professor always taught it to me like this: Belief in a proposition (like Jesus is God) can be anywhere between 51-100% certainty. Once we reach 100% certainty, though, there’s no need for faith; because now we have knowledge. Remember, faith is “the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1). Once we finally see, or as Paul characterized it, “know[ing] fully just as [we] have also been fully known” (1 Corinthians 13:12), then faith will no longer be required. Until then, none of us know much of anything without a shadow of a doubt. And to take the attitude that we should act as such, in my estimation, leads to the kinds of atrocities you referenced.

    Thanks for the opportunity to interact! And thanks for your post, Logan! I never really looked at POTA that way before. Thought-provoking.

  4. Pingback: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes: Learned Behavior | Let There Be Movies

Care to Comment?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s