Featured Do many Christians like the religious aspects of “Star Wars” movies?

[AgnosticBoy]

– The Dark Side is dangerous, yes — it shows what happens when shadow overwhelms balance.

Jesus overcame his dark side by externalizing (projecting) it and resisting it's tempting.

This is a good observation. I also think we all have a dark side.

FOr instance, I think of a wife who has an unfaithful husband. This wife has never done anything illegal, and everyone who looks at her would probably never expect that she ever would harm anyone. Then, she later poisons her husband.

Do we say that her dark side only started out as a reaction to her husband cheating? Or was it always there?

THe point I'm getting at is that we're all capable of great evil, but fortunately, most of us hold it back by staying within the good side (following the law, not acting on or out of negativity, etc).

 

[Scooter]

– The Dark Side is dangerous, yes — it shows what happens when shadow overwhelms balance.

Jesus overcame his dark side by externalizing (projecting) it and resisting it's tempting.

This is a good observation. I also think we all have a dark side.

FOr instance, I think of a wife who has an unfaithful husband. This wife has never done anything illegal, and everyone who looks at her would probably never expect that she ever would harm anyone. Then, she later poisons her husband.

Do we say that her dark side only started out as a reaction to her husband cheating? Or was it always there?

THe point I'm getting at is that we're all capable of great evil, but fortunately, most of us hold it back by staying within the good side (following the law, not acting on or out of negativity, etc).

It’s called the sin nature. People are capable of extreme violence and cruelty. Even those who are considered tame and docile. Sin can turn the kindest person into a monster.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Joseph Campbell’s Hero with a Thousand Faces

I like this optimistic title.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

The bible is literally about the opposing forces and its many characters portray these battles...and what's more so too does the real world...

• Light vs. darkness (Genesis 1, John 1).
• Spirit vs. flesh (Paul’s letters).
• God vs. Satan (Job, Gospels, Revelation).
• Obedience vs. rebellion (Israel’s history).
• Life vs. death (Ezekiel’s valley of dry bones, Christ’s resurrection).

I’m going to try to pull the beginning from William Blake’s poem “Tyger, Tyger.” At least, I think that’s the title. It is the beginning.

And yes, spelled with a “y”

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43687/the-tyger

The Tyger

“Tyger Tyger, burning bright,
“In the forests of the night;
“What immortal hand or eye,
“Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

“In what distant deeps or skies.
“Burnt the fire of thine eyes?
“On what wings dare he aspire?
“What the hand, dare seize the fire?

.

.

.

 

[William]

– The Dark Side is dangerous, yes — it shows what happens when shadow overwhelms balance.

Jesus overcame his dark side by externalizing (projecting) it and resisting it's tempting.

This is a good observation. I also think we all have a dark side.

FOr instance, I think of a wife who has an unfaithful husband. This wife has never done anything illegal, and everyone who looks at her would probably never expect that she ever would harm anyone. Then, she later poisons her husband.

Do we say that her dark side only started out as a reaction to her husband cheating? Or was it always there?

THe point I'm getting at is that we're all capable of great evil, but fortunately, most of us hold it back by staying within the good side (following the law, not acting on or out of negativity, etc).

Yes, if humans, shadow and all, are made in God’s image, then the “dark side” is not foreign to the image itself. It belongs within the likeness. The Bible shows this too: God creates, heals, redeems — and also destroys, judges, hardens. The image in humanity reflects that full spectrum.

 

[William]

– The Dark Side is dangerous, yes — it shows what happens when shadow overwhelms balance.

Jesus overcame his dark side by externalizing (projecting) it and resisting it's tempting.

This is a good observation. I also think we all have a dark side.

FOr instance, I think of a wife who has an unfaithful husband. This wife has never done anything illegal, and everyone who looks at her would probably never expect that she ever would harm anyone. Then, she later poisons her husband.

Do we say that her dark side only started out as a reaction to her husband cheating? Or was it always there?

THe point I'm getting at is that we're all capable of great evil, but fortunately, most of us hold it back by staying within the good side (following the law, not acting on or out of negativity, etc).

It’s called the sin nature. People are capable of extreme violence and cruelty. Even those who are considered tame and docile. Sin can turn the kindest person into a monster.

The phrase “sin nature” is not directly biblical — it’s theological shorthand.


The Bible speaks of “flesh” (Greek sarx) as opposed to spirit (Romans 7–8, Galatians 5).
It speaks of “original sin” through Adam (Romans 5).
But the exact term “sin nature” doesn’t appear.

It’s a later doctrinal construct, mainly from Augustine’s theology and developed in Reformation thought (Calvin, Luther). They used it to describe what they judged as humanity’s innate tendency toward sin.

 

[Scooter]

The phrase “sin nature” is not directly biblical — it’s theological shorthand.


The Bible speaks of “flesh” (Greek sarx) as opposed to spirit (Romans 7–8, Galatians 5).
It speaks of “original sin” through Adam (Romans 5).
But the exact term “sin nature” doesn’t appear.

It’s a later doctrinal construct, mainly from Augustine’s theology and developed in Reformation thought (Calvin, Luther). They used it to describe what they judged as humanity’s innate tendency toward sin.

True, the phrase "sin nature" is not found in the Bible, but neither is the phrase "original sin". Your claim that Augustine came up with sin nature is incorrect. Augustine is credited with developing the thought of original sin. It appears you got your wires crossed. Here is a quote that confirms Augustine developed the idea of original sin: Believing the grace of Christ was indispensable to human freedom, he helped formulate the doctrine of original sin...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo
While "sin nature" is not stated in those words, the idea is seen in the two references you made: Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. And Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

The Greek word for flesh is Sarx as you stated. If you delve deeper you can see where this word can be used to define one's nature. Here is Strong's definition:

σάρξ sárx, sarx
probably from the base of G4563; flesh (as stripped of the skin), i.e. (strictly) the meat of an animal (as food), or (by extension) the body (as opposed to the soul (or spirit), or as the symbol of what is external, or as the means of kindred), or (by implication) human nature (with its frailties (physically or morally) and passions), or (specially), a human being (as such):—carnal(-ly, + -ly minded), flesh(-ly).

So while there is a fine line between "original sin" and "sin nature" there is a difference.

 

[William]

The phrase “sin nature” is not directly biblical — it’s theological shorthand.


The Bible speaks of “flesh” (Greek sarx) as opposed to spirit (Romans 7–8, Galatians 5).
It speaks of “original sin” through Adam (Romans 5).
But the exact term “sin nature” doesn’t appear.

It’s a later doctrinal construct, mainly from Augustine’s theology and developed in Reformation thought (Calvin, Luther). They used it to describe what they judged as humanity’s innate tendency toward sin.

True, the phrase "sin nature" is not found in the Bible, but neither is the phrase "original sin". Your claim that Augustine came up with sin nature is incorrect. Augustine is credited with developing the thought of original sin. It appears you got your wires crossed. Here is a quote that confirms Augustine developed the idea of original sin: Believing the grace of Christ was indispensable to human freedom, he helped formulate the doctrine of original sin...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo
While "sin nature" is not stated in those words, the idea is seen in the two references you made: Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. And Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

The Greek word for flesh is Sarx as you stated. If you delve deeper you can see where this word can be used to define one's nature. Here is Strong's definition:

σάρξ sárx, sarx
probably from the base of G4563; flesh (as stripped of the skin), i.e. (strictly) the meat of an animal (as food), or (by extension) the body (as opposed to the soul (or spirit), or as the symbol of what is external, or as the means of kindred), or (by implication) human nature (with its frailties (physically or morally) and passions), or (specially), a human being (as such):—carnal(-ly, + -ly minded), flesh(-ly).

So while there is a fine line between "original sin" and "sin nature" there is a difference.

It’s a little ironic, Pastor. Earlier you dismissed terms like “dark side” and “Jedi” because they don’t appear in the Bible. But now you’re defending concepts like “sin nature” and “original sin,” which also don’t appear in the Bible as literal wording.


The real point here isn’t about specific vocabulary, but about the concepts. And conceptually, Star Wars does mirror the same religious themes we find in scripture: light and dark, flesh and spirit, father and son, fall and redemption. Different words, same archetypes. That’s why these stories resonate — they’re drawing from the same deep patterns.

 

[Scooter]

It’s a little ironic, Pastor. Earlier you dismissed terms like “dark side” and “Jedi” because they don’t appear in the Bible. But now you’re defending concepts like “sin nature” and “original sin,” which also don’t appear in the Bible as literal wording.

The concept of a sin nature is clearly taught in Scripture. Again, there are heroes and villains (Jedi and Sith)in the Sackett series. There is good and evil (light and darkness) in Romeo and Juliet. I do not apply fictional stereotypes to Biblical principles. If you want to equate Darth Vader to Satan that’s your prerogative. To me, doing so fictionalizes truths that are too important.