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

[William]

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.

I do not apply fictional stereotypes to Biblical principles.

I myself don't mind doing so, as I consider fiction to be useful, and don't accept the bible stories as literal fact. Useful fiction, sure.

 

[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.

I do not apply fictional stereotypes to Biblical principles.

I myself don't mind doing so, as I consider fiction to be useful, and don't accept the bible stories as literal fact. Useful fiction, sure.

And therein lies the rub

 

[AgnosticBoy]

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.

Reasonable, yes.. but definitely a problem for Christian theology.

Christians would say that no evil can be found in God, but yet I do wonder where did evil come from? It didn't come from Adam, because angels before him were evil, including the Devil.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

I actually think Marvel and DC comics captures a lot of what religion and Gods offer. Of course, comics are all make-believe so don't even think you'll get web slinging powers from a spider bite.


Was going to check out a new Marvel movie called Thunderbolts. There's a character in there called Sentry. He has a good side and a dark side. His good side he's known as Sentry and he's got light based powers, can manipulate energy, etc. BUt his dark side, he's called the Void.
Short clip:

For any Marvel fans, here's a bio on him:

 

[William]

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.

Reasonable, yes.. but definitely a problem for Christian theology.

Christians would say that no evil can be found in God, but yet I do wonder where did evil come from? It didn't come from Adam, because angels before him were evil, including the Devil.

Evil doesn’t need to be explained as a rival power outside God. In biblical imagery, even what we call “evil” is folded into God’s sovereignty — sometimes as withdrawal, sometimes as judgment, sometimes as the shadow side of freedom. The “dark side” is real, but it’s not foreign to the image of God.

We could just as easily compare LoTR mythology to bible mythology - and the common thread in human story-telling happens to be good vs evil light vs dark but if we look at the story of Moses and Pharaoh and God hardening hearts not as acts of evil vs good but as ignorance vs knowledge, perhaps something might come from that?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

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.

For the record, the concept is echoed in the OT as well...

Genesis 4:6-7
6 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”

 

[William]

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.

Reasonable, yes.. but definitely a problem for Christian theology.

Christians would say that no evil can be found in God, but yet I do wonder where did evil come from? It didn't come from Adam, because angels before him were evil, including the Devil.

Evil doesn’t need to be explained as a rival power outside God. In biblical imagery, even what we call “evil” is folded into God’s sovereignty — sometimes as withdrawal, sometimes as judgment, sometimes as the shadow side of freedom. The “dark side” is real, but it’s not foreign to the image of God.

We could just as easily compare LoTR mythology to bible mythology - and the common thread in human story-telling happens to be good vs evil light vs dark but if we look at the story of Moses and Pharaoh and God hardening hearts not as acts of evil vs good but as ignorance vs knowledge, perhaps something might come from that?

So the "problem" is in how good and evil delegate and where YHVH appears then to cross the line...or where historic and modern Christianity appear to cross the line...yet without the delegation, YHVH appears to be - quite naturally - the God of this world...

 

[AgnosticBoy]

And therein lies the rub

As an agnostic, I would also that this comment applies to this statement of yours, as well:

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.

Both outlooks, seeing it as complete fiction vs. thinking it is beyond compare (too sacred) can be problematic. The former may dismiss its value seeing it like fairy tales just because it's not rooted in fact and uses a lot of myth. There is definitely some uniqueness and good, and perhaps even special principles in the Bible. In fact, it's not all fiction! I don't believe this applies to William since he acknowledges the Bible's usefulness. As a Christian, I read the Bible, cover-to-cover, in 2 or 3 different English versions (Niv, KJV, etc), and as a non-believer I still continue to study it though not as much.

When it comes to the other outlook of the Bible being sacred beyond compare, I think that is looking it at too highly which can lead someone to miss the ordinary features. It is literature at the end of the day in that it is written by humans who are prone to error, cultural bias, etc. The same applies to any other piece of literature. Whether or not God is behind any of that, is still debatable.

 

[William]

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.

For the record, the concept is echoed in the OT as well...

Genesis 4:6-7
6 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”

If we take the text at face value, “sin” is not an essence inside Cain but a presence outside, one he can resist.
That aligns more with “ignorance vs. knowledge,” or “shadow vs. light,” than with a hardwired “nature.”
To then insist there must be a “sin nature” is to force the Bible into later doctrinal molds.

 

[William]

And therein lies the rub

As an agnostic, I would also that this comment applies to this statement of yours, as well:

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.

Both outlooks, seeing it as complete fiction vs. thinking it is beyond compare (too sacred) can be problematic. The former may dismiss its value seeing it like fairy tales just because it's not rooted in fact and uses a lot of myth. There is definitely some uniqueness and good, and perhaps even special principles in the Bible. In fact, it's not all fiction! I don't believe this applies to William since he acknowledges the Bible's usefulness. As a Christian, I read the Bible, cover-to-cover, in 2 or 3 different English versions (Niv, KJV, etc), and as a non-believer I still continue to study it though not as much.

When it comes to the other outlook of the Bible being sacred beyond compare, I think that is looking it at too highly which can lead someone to miss the ordinary features. It is literature at the end of the day in that it is written by humans who are prone to error, cultural bias, etc. The same applies to any other piece of literature. Whether or not God is behind any of that, is still debatable.

I think the key is that fiction doesn’t mean false. Story, myth, and symbol are often how truth gets carried. Star Wars, LOTR, Shakespeare - none are “factual,” yet they speak deeply to human experience. The Bible works the same way: literature with human fingerprints, yet full of truth that shows itself through story. If we frame it not just as good vs. evil but as ignorance vs. knowledge, Pharaoh and Moses, Cain and Abel, Jedi and Sith all point to the same reality - the human struggle to see, and the consequences of remaining blind.