I actually really enjoyed Avatar for the wonderful world it depicts (of course) but indeed also because of the depiction of spirituality in it and the contrast of a spiritual, nature-loving people vs. a cold, mechanical, technological world. And yes, the fact that for once the good guys are religious in some way, I find really refreshing today. Yes, the political ideas are pretty black&white, but at least for once we get a beautiful, exciting film with something positive to say about faith.
Avatar is really more of an odd cartoon parody of nature mysticism. The whole premise of this predominately digital film is a man downloading his consciousness into an empty biological machine that comes with a built-in USB cable which jacks into a planet-wide fibre-optic network, allowing him to pwn n00bs with his gaming skills. My last hike in the mountains was not like this. It's a supposed allegory of nature for the computer age, environmentalism for people who don't go outside.
1. Nature in some way reflects God (basic cause and effect thinking)
2. The more we look, the more we can sense God's presence in nature (the Mind behind its mechanics).
3. Therefore, the natural world can become a material manifestation of God's presence, while still remaining the natural world and, thus, fundamentally different than God. Yet, in some way, reflects the Presence of the Divine?
Avatar supports the demonic cause. Demons against humans. Fallen angel human hybrids. The blue skinned demons are from my pagan background - celtic. Once saved, I was shocked to find that God was a 'person'. I was now accountable, afraid, in relationship. I was no longer a little god, tapping into an impersonal force. I was eye to eye, heart to heart, spirit to spirit with my creator.
I once was asked to describe the Holy Spirit to a young woman with a fairly secular background with another young woman who was a Pastor's daughter. I simply said, "It's kind of like the Force," at which point the Pastor's daughter chymed in, "Yes, It's a lot like that."
I think that provides something of a tacit statement about the condition of our society...lol
Maybe Hollywood doesn't accept your view of God because that view is ridiculous; a being that we have no proof even exists yet still has an impact on the world.
Fr. I think you are limiting what God is 'The Holy Spirit the giver of life' God is not only the creator of the universe, he is 'the word' that you speak of in the form of Jesus and he is also the avatar nature spirituality in the form of the Holy Spirit . God not only created the Universe, he is an integral part of it. God is the beginning and end of all things.
Some movies have a theme strung into them. A Man Called Horse, Dancing with Wolfs, and now Avatar are, I think, have a anti materialsm theme. Or materialsim = civilization.
So your saying you know exactly what God is and that the Bible would call the energy of the earth a creature ? I thought the Bible cleary states that we will never fully know what God is or his meaning, but it's funny how you know what he is and his meaning in your video here. How humble you are sir lol. Maybe you should write a new version of the Bible or add a couple of books to it like everyone else in the history of religion seems to do ? Who knows
I've always been interested in the concept of religion and aliens, but one of the things I found interesting it's depiction of technology. Aliens are typically portrayed as thousands of years ahead of Earth, but in "Avatar", the humans are technologically advanced, and the Na'vi are about on par with American Indians in the 17th century. I don't see there being a mutual exclusivity between technology (science) and spirituality (religion), but do you see an underlying message of that?
@JRserver One historical observation is that native American cultures like the Incas and Aztecs were overwhelmed by technologically superior european powers at the time. An important consequences of this was that European religion came to dominate over indigenous religion. The religions of our native cultures are really just accidents of history and Christianity is no exception. Perhaps if the Mayans had been ahead of us and colonized Europe we would all now be worshiping Queztacotal, who knows.
Thank you, Father, for this commentary! I've been telling my friends ever since I saw this when it came out that it's a great movie despite all the talk against it. As long as you aren't easily fooled by the anti-Catholic concepts, it's quite possible to be very entertained by this highly visually stimulating movie.
I actually find the religions that have that mystical power that lives within all things to be much more loving and far more beautiful than anything from the Abrahamic faiths.
1) From Wikipedia: "In a 2007 interview with Time magazine, Cameron was asked about the meaning of the term avatar, to which he replied, 'It's an incarnation of one of the Hindu gods taking a flesh form. In this film what that means is that the human technology in the future is capable of injecting a human's intelligence into a remotely located body, a biological body.'"
2) What is interesting is that in ancient paintings, you can find the Hindu god Krishna (an avatar) painted blue. I wonder if that might be where Cameron got the idea for the blue Na'vi people.
The Navi have similarities to the original inhabitants of Turtle Island, as they called it, before the greatest genocide in the history of the world devastated them, and one aspect of that genocide was the inevitable "It's of the Devil" comments of priests whenever Native Americans performed their rituals or their shaman sought visions, whatever - it was always "Devil," and my sympathies are not with the priests here. They were too certain, and too disrespectful of a spirituality not their own.
@not2tees That may be the case of some ultra-hard priests, but the Catholic Church has clarified its viewpoint on other religions already. Such as in the person of soon-to-be Blessed Pope John Paul II, wherein he is seen mingling with tribal leaders and watching these dances and rituals performed in St. Peter's. He is reaching out, much like a missionary, to these people of different faith. So I cannot say that the Church is disrespectful of a spirituality not its own.
@not2tees Pope Benedict added to this, when he emphasized religious freedom in his recent addresses, especially in the light of church bombings of persecution. True, the Catholic doctrine holds that anything not of God is not of God, but the Church has softened its position since Vatican II. Now, a more "pastoral" instead of a "doctrinal" approach is applied to missionary work among people of different faiths. The Church does not judge entire peoples by their physical and outward rituals.
They go "prove god, show me god", then when someone says "here it is", then why dont accept it? nobody ever wants to accept it. Just like a child asks his mother "who's my father?", and the mother says "HE is your father", wont you believe your mother? The nature is the mother. The golden mean proportion, its all around you, in all forms, phi, that is intelligence.. I think it's time to grow up and just look at the facts. Quantum physics.
@EsuDalyvis I agree. Nonbelievers often circumvent the evidence presented to them, because they don't want to be humble enough that they have found the Truth. Faith requires surrender, which requires humility. They're afraid of this moral direction steering their lives. This can also be their reason of why they left our their religions. They want to be independent.
i can't prove that jesus existed. for that matter i can't prove that everything isn't just an illusion. all i really know is that i seem to be having a conscious experience. I like to believe that Jesus existed and that I am loved.
"god" personally speaks and acts? hmmm, well it seems to me that "god" has never shown himself or helped anyone EVER, and im not talking about someones story of "god" thats like " my mom was sick, she was dieing and doctors said she only had 1 day left.. every one prayed and blah blah blah, A FUCKING MIRACLE, "GOD" HAS HEALED HER", but the thing is, did "god" heal her or did medicine.. there is no "god", use your brain. we evolved so we could have the power of knowledge, NOW FUCKING USE IT.
@RockLIFE001 u can not know taht god doesnt exist, because u doubt, people who belive know that their is one. regarding the evidence- have u evev heard of fatima, lourdes, medjugorje, padre pio and many more, read about it first then make insulting statemants
@livno211 I agree. Saying God doesn't exist is a very arrogant statement. So you can transcend God in His knowledge? You can know more about God? These evidences are good, but for a solid nonbeliever, I suggest more general and basic proofs. Try reading St. Thomas Aquinas, Blaise Pascal and CS Lewis on their proofs on God.
@pint047 I know; I know: we religious types have such a tough time being rational. Take a look at my video on Zeitgeist, which has been up for about a year.
@wordonfirevideo What if there were someone there who could use talking to a priest but did not have the guts, enough willingness or whatever to go to a church to find one?
Jesus taught non violence Jesus taught UNCONDITIONAL Love Jesus said these things I do you can also do, Jesus said if you had the faith the size of a mustard seed you could tell that mountain to move. Jesus wasn't religious and, father you seem like a very nice and sincere man, but I don't think Jesus is Catholic. Why is it assumed that spirituality is religion. "Just war" is an oxymoron. Turn the other cheek.
@bthegood "Jesus" never existed.. now, before you tell me he did.. present me with some evidence of his existance.. ohh yea, and the bible is not a reliable source to obtain that information im waiting for you to present to me.
@RockLIFE001 Don't wait. Search out and find the information by yourself. Don't sit and wish that things would just appear like magic. Jesus, God, doesn't work that way. "Seek and you will find". Put yourself in this disposition. You will not find if you will not seek.
@3rosesred Thomas Aquinas developed a just war doctrine. In it it is possible to defend your loved ones in a just war with strict conditions for it to be just. It is also possible to defend self or others. However, Christianity neither intended to be spread by coercion or violence or means to advocate any violence - far from it Christ was (is) anti-violent in an active way. Look at Pope John Paul IIs call NOT to start the war in Iraq. He predicted that it would lead to prolonged suffering.
whats interesting is that many liberals are very tolerant of paganism. But take a sharp 360 turn when it comes to christianity or other abrahamic religions.
@CamillaCalamity That really is an ignorant comment. Read about the Pagan persecutions of Christians during the reign of emperor Nero and Trajan(apostolic era). Pagans feeding Christians in coliseums to lions and other ferocious beasts. Apparently the pagans had no problem shoving their religion down the throats of babies when they sacrificed them to Molech either. Or the Incas. Paganism led to enormous savagery.
@CreedChrist Ignorant? Guess who owned the land before the Christians even existed. Pagans! Paganism in all its forms and denominations is the oldest religion in the world. When Christians and Muslims showed up of course there was violence. Do you expect people to just sit there while they're being taken over?
@CamillaCalamity Pagan is a collective term for non-Jew/non-Christian (and non-Muslim). These people were not of uniform faith and they did not have denominations. They fought bitter wars and enjoyed gladiatoral fights to the death, pedophilia, infanticide, murder of entire families for any reason, slavery, sex orgies, religion and politics were intermixed - Emperor=god, etc. Chinese emperors would put entire armies to death when the emperor died to hide the location of the tomb. Nasty world.
@CamillaCalamity "That's because Pagans don't shove their religions down our throats or wage holy wars like abrahamic followers do."
Yeah that is pretty key right there. There's just something repulsive about Zealots who seek to convert everyone. I would rather go and ask wisdom from someone who seems at peace with himself and his spirituality than someone who seems... politicized.
@HarfangX Well I don't know, pagans like Attila the Hun, Vikings and Genghis Khan murdered more people than a few Crusades which were political wars against the political spread of Islam. Pagan Aztecs and Mayans in Central/South America were also not so peaceful. Most conflicts are motivated by secular (non-Godly) reasons , such as money, power, race, ethnicity, land, resources, glory, etc. Surely you see that secularism is the driving force of most violence? Christianity is anti-violence.
@HarfangX"That's because Pagans don't shove their religions down our throats or wage holy wars like abrahamic followers do." Where do Christians shove their religion down your throat? The last time I came across an evangelising Christian was 12 years ago. In contrast secular humanism, is the religion of governments and Hollywood and we see it evangelised on many occasions. What's more, is that we have to pay to hear it. Who forced you to come here? Surely Fr Barron did not knock on your door?
@HarfangX "The Christianized Romans could not understand how God could allow these pagans to destroy their once-mighty empire; they called Attila the "Scourge of God."" Look at Asianhistory.about.com - there is much info about Attila. These guys were pagan and they were bloodthirsty. The Huns came from Asia. They were most definitely pagans. They initially caused mayhem and death in China. Then across Scythia and finally Europe. They also fought amongst each other. Nasty lot.
@PuraguCryostato I honestly think you're using a quote I made from another comment as a launch pad for your own debate, which relates in no way to what I said. You focus on the war aspect from the quote when my response to it was about the expansionist nature of the church.
Until you're actually willing to talk to me... you'll have that debate alone.
@HarfangX You agreed to the comment made by someone else about religious wars. You alluded to the fact that pagans were somehow gentle and non violent or perhaps you only care about peoples' motivations in fighting wars.Pagan Nero (and others) murdered Christians because they were Christian. I also pointed out that any Christian cruelty would most of the time be motivated by imperialist desires-such as increase in land, resources, prestige, wealth,etc. by rulers who were not centered on Christ.
#4- To my knowledge there is absolutely no reason to believe the Viking expensionism was driven by the desire to impose their religion on others... on theory even has it as a reaction to Charlemagne who "used force and terror to Christianize all pagans" and that this was backlash for it.
#5- Not gonna bother researching Mayans, at this point I think you're throwing things out to see what sticks.
@HarfangX #4. Whatever the reasons for Viking pillaging were they resulted in violence and death. Christianity is an anti-violent faith. It makes people more moderate. In this light Christian vikings were less cruel then their pagan ancestors. BTW according to Viking mythology a warrior who died in battle ate at Valhalla. Charlamagne helped unite France which resulted in the beginning of European civilisation. Without him, Europe would no doubt be Muslim and you wouldn't have a PC to type on.
#6- If you're gonna serve me the same old "Non-christian world" evils vs Christian evils and which is worst I'm not interested... I don't want any evils and you're off topic... which is "Religious expansionism", or perhaps... Secular anti-religious movements...
#7- Just take the highly politicized Evangelicals, Fundamentalist and Mormons imposing their views, like for prop-8 in California & the amount of out of state money and protesters that came in from Utah and Texas.
@HarfangX I want you to realise that the world was not peaceful and rosy before Christianity, that's all. Christianity is ACTIVELY anti violent at its core, pagan beliefs were at best neutral towards violence. Pagans pillaged and fought against each other more than Christians. The early Christian European kings were pagans but merely Christian in name only. The unification of Europe into nation states was driven by the Christian Church. We now have the European Union because of that. Thanks.
@HarfangX #7, I'm not American so I can't comment on Prop-8. However, the way I see it is that both sides actively transport in supporters and use any means necessary to get their views across. The left in America has an advantage in that Hollywood, most news outlets and most colleges tow the Leftist view, while the Right has an advantage amongst the groups you mentioned and uses churches to help raise support for their views. I don't however see Evangelicals forcing you to become Xtian.
@HarfangX I also want to reiterate this point: despite the fact that nasty things happened throughout history Christianity is actively anti-violent. It may have been hijacked sometimes but the motivations for its hijacking and violence were almost always imperial in nature (ie secular). The last time I checked Jesus did not instruct His followers to conquer an empire for Him, the apostles were to shake the dust off their sandals and leave towns which rejected them, not lay siege. Thank you. :-)
Ok. What is to be "Pagan"? You worship something that is not any one god?? LOL. If so, let me tell you that Eywa is one god that the Na'vi worship, But, their god or goddess is also everywhere. Why is that bad?
@wordonfirevideo I'd say (after having spent a number of years among them) that NEO-paganism is nature worship, but that definition only goes back to the early 1900s. I'd say that CLASSICAL paganism, the kind that the Jews would have encountered among the Greeks and Romans centuries ago, had more to do with ancestry, your "gens" or your people, who your family is, etc. If that makes sense. I don't see almost any connection to classical paganism among neo-pagans at ALL; most disdain history.
Fr. Barron says: "God is a transcendent power, who has created the whole universe, and who personally speaks and acts."
By using the verb "is," Fr. Barron is positing that he Knows what he says to be Absolute Truth. He Knows God is a transcendent power. He Knows He has created the universe. He knows God is a Being who personally speaks and acts. I don't believe this to be Truth. Fr. Barron believes God is a transcendent power. He believes God created the universe. He believes God is a Being...
who personally speaks and acts. It is important to draw a distinction between what Fr. Barron believes to be Absolute Truth -- that God exists as transcendent power, as One who created the universe, and as one who personally speaks and acts -- and what is Absolute Truth.
I especially loved the part where Fr. Barron talked about "the kind of religion that Hollywood finds acceptable," speaking down to it and describing it as a lesser attitude towards spirituality.
Exactly! Nobody will ever fear the "force," in the Biblical sense. And the "force" will never draw anybody in a personal sense. Haven't seen the film but interested in what you think of the heavy "transhumanist" theme throughout?
I have a comment and I hope you respond... The reason I watched this particular movie was because everyone said how good it was, so I checked out DecentFilms to make sure I wasn't going in for something I would regret. What bothers me is that nobody--not even you--mentioned the pornographic scene, and I had no warning. It confuses me that with all its flaws (and especially this particular one) you still promote it.
@jayreiacira Well first, friend, I'm hardly "promoting" it; I was sharply critical of it in my review. And second, I'm not sure which scene you're referring to. I didn't see anything particularly "pornographic" in Avatar.
Lets not try the trick of guilt through association. Yes, Pantheist belief is popular in Hollywood; but it was also the belief of the Stoics. I have genuine awe for the universe; I don't know anyone who can look out on a star filled night contemplating the vast distances and vast size of the universe without being struck by the beauty and Majesty of the universe. Let's not try to borrow that feeling to support a personal god with exactly zero evidence.
@cheetah100 The question to ask is "where did that Beauty and that Majesty come from?" We know that the universe is not self-explanatory, for it is marked in every detail by contingency. So who endowed it with such impressive qualities?
@wordonfirevideo Beauty and that Majesty is a judgment we make. It is like asking where numbers come from. It was I who endowed it with Majesty because it was my judgment, The question is "why do you feel you know the answer?"
@Darusdei God could not be God if he came from anything. Jesus and the Holy Ghost proceed from the Father, of course, but that's different than the "come from" you mean.
@Darusdei Whether it's always been there is beside the point. What matters is that it is nothing but a congeries of contingent things--and hence it needs an explanation. The universe is non-self-sufficient.
@Darusdei What I'm arguing is that contingency has to be grounded, finally, in some reality which is radically non-contingent, unconditioned. This is what I mean by "God." I'm not pulling God into the discussion arbitrarily; I'm arguing for his existence on logical grounds.
Nice point. As Sigourney Weaver's character shows - 'Ewa' is in the biology, it's measurable; the Navi actually have their god's telephone number, and Yoda can raise X-wings from swamps without using wires. In the UK, Jedi has been listed as an official religion for about ten years, I think. Who knows, in a thousand years' time Obi-Wan Kenobi might have replaced Mohammed!
AVATAR PARA MI ES UN FILM PANDEISMO "TODO ES DIOS" "LA NATURALEZA ES DIOS" PERO SEPUEDE APLICAR A LA INVASION DE USA A LOS ARABES QUE VAN CONTRA SU CULTURA!!! Y ESO HAY QUE RESPETARLO Y ORIENTARLO AL VERDADERO DIOS ALLAH!!EL MISERICORDIOSO Y NO SOLO LA NATURALEZA QUE ES LA HIPOTESIS DE GREENPEACE.
when a person says to 'be aware' it means 'dont follow it or i'll spank you' ultimately i liked this guys approach to it, but take in the spirituality of any film with a story like this. it's all that it is; the notion of spirituality. hollywood just re-uses an age old take on it.
I watched the movie several times. One thing I saw about the relationship with their God was one I think many people as Christians can learn was the Na'vi appeared to have a childlike faith and trust in their God. They didn't appear to make God into an aggreeable "genie" figure which acts when we say. Often people make it so that God says something, but it is really their own thoughts. The Na'vi seemed to allow their God to act in it's own will and trust that what their God does is....
@Stitchman3875 in the best interest of all his creation. As a Catholic, this is something I tend to struggle with from time to time. So I do see some lessons we can learn from the spirituality of the film.
It is funny to mark God as a person, in a human way. Why? Because, human personality have certain limits, human mind and intellect too. When God, throughout history, talks with man, he is doing it in a a way which is understandable to us, as person to person. That does not mean that God is person in our way of meaning. It would be honest to say: nobody (except few people, maybe) knows about nature of God, and nobody will ever know all. So, there is no way to tell which religion is better
@zkmplayer Hello. You are correct when you say God is not a person in our way of meaning, and also when nobody will ever know all of God's nature (for He is infinite, thus nobody can fully know Him except Himself). But it does not logically follow that there is no way to tell which religion is better. If God chose to reveal Himself and His nature in a way humans can understand, in Moses, the prophets, or Jesus Christ, then we can tell which religion is "better." God bless you.
@richgr1123 You are using evidence based on one book (in this case Bible) and tradition and maybe dogmatic theology. That is not enough- other religions also have their holy books, tradition and teachings. So your opinion is based on your belief, and logically you can not say that Christianity is better than other religions.
I notice a lot of people commenting on here have lost sight of the fact that Father Barron is talking about the Biblical God. And he makes that very clear in his video - in fact, he makes this very clear in all of his videos. He states it directlly. So many people are offering New Age type of gods and spiritualities, but it's not the Biblical God or Christian spirituality. Don't expect Father Barron to get New Age on you. Not gonna happen. He's a Roman Catholic priest. Period.
Father, let me ask you a question about Pope John Paul II: didn't he offer an apology some years back, to peoples who have been hurt by the Church over the centuries? How did you personally feel about that? Is it right for the Church to humble itself in that way? And I think of how the white people, when coming to the US, treated the natives - it wasn't good. Was it really necessary to have their culture wiped out? Do you see what I mean? Please enlighten.
last thought "hollywood spirituality" that movie wasn't suppose to create religion at all, you christians get mad at harry potter for having magic thats power of gods or something, next thing you know your going to get mad at toy story 3 for saying toys are living things and your going to accuse people of thinking toys can really talk....
and "GOD" doesn't talk to you , they just wrote they talk to you....... the only people who still believe god talks to them are the mormons who have 20 wifes each....
Doesn't the bible say the atonement was only for white people or something... and the bible tells people to kill people who aren't white and take their land........ i thought christians h8ed avatar because the white people don't kill all the avatar, christians killed the indians because they weren't christian...... so i thought christians wanted the avatar to die because they weren't christian..... christians are just racist A-holes.....
If the Biblical God is believed to have created all in existence, wouldn't you believe that Him, being the Source of the Universe, would be imminent in all his creation seeing as he is connected to it?If I would better connect to God in the form of the natural world, would you not believe the God would show himself in the form of a plant or animal?Example:God revealed himself to Moses in the form of a burning bush.So why not the Giant Tree of the Na'vi, or the jellyfish-like floating creatures?
@GooglyBee23 The true God is indeed immanent to the world, but he is not reducible to it. His immanence is in tension with his radical transcendence to what he has made. The tradition catches this by referring to God as ipsum esse subsistens, the sheer act of to-be itself.
@wordonfirevideo I don't believe it's so black and white as a maker creating his inventions and letting them be. I believe the maker infuses the creation with the use of their own energy and tools, thus any creature ever in existence will always be an extension of the maker. Meaning anything in nature, whether it be humans, or animals, or plants. If not, then how can us humans be so closely connected to a being so imminent from us? Maybe as another being God may bear his/her own conscience mind,
@GooglyBee23 No! Creatures are not, in any sense, "extensions" of God. They exist in radical distinction from their creator, even as they depend upon God every moment.
@wordonfirevideo I believe differently. I believe we are all of the same source, and that we are all extensions of each other, as well as any other energy existing in this infinite Universe of ours. You are me, had I been you. And I am you, had you been me. Get it? You are me had I been born you and become a priest in Christianity. And I am you, had you been born in my position and become a Pagan.
@wordonfirevideo Either way,both our beliefs reflect much of our individual spirituality, and since both are different, there may never be a time when we will agree upon this topic.Which is fine with me;I'd rather all have their individual thoughts on an issue and than be robots & all think exactly alike. There are many other ways to express an agreement on something, and I don't think religion is one of them. As I was once told before, "Acknowledge our differences. Celebrate our similarities."
@wordonfirevideo but being made from the maker(s), I believe we share more in common with God than humans give credit. I believe it to be a "web of life", one strand being affected by another strand, and all linked to the center-point of the web; all made of the same material as the center; the center being it's own "transcendence" as the 'center' of the web, but imminent unto the web as a whole
@GooglyBee23 All of that is fine, as long as you stress, with equal emphasis, the radical otherness of God. God is both immanent and transcendent. False spiritualities and theologies give us an either/or in this regard.
Firstly, the views in this movie are not religious;religion is somethin constructed by the human mind.Their practices are a part of their culture,the way they live, not "a daily practice".Secondly, the belief is that this Great Mother being is not only imminent in all things,but is also transcendent.Who is to judge a being that is believed to have created the Universe.Even the Bible does tell all of what or who God is.Who is to say that this Maternal being cannot be both imminent & transcendent?
Avatar is another word for incarnation. Jake Sully has 2 natures: a human nature and a Navi nature. He is paralyzed from the waist down, but at the same time he can run and hunt with the Navi. Similarly, God is omnipotent and omniscient, but in the person of Jesus Christ he suffers and takes upon himself our human experiences of anxiety, sadness, loneliness, and betrayal. It's sort of the mirror-image of what Christ did, though, because he was selfish and screwed things up for the Navi.
@Olufff I said so. My line, I think, was "even more than Lord of the Rings, Avatar is a fully realized imaginative world." That assumes that the Lord of the Rings was indeed such a world. I just thought that Avatar was more so.
Could "the deep background energy of all things" possibly be interpreted as the creative activity of the Holy Spirit in the world? I ask this question in humility and in curiosity, and not with the intention of challenging the Biblical worldview or proposing a new doctrine. Peace, Irish Catholic
@1r1shCath0l1c No it can't be looked at as the Holy Spirit. You surrender to the Holy Spirit so that God can use you not the other way around. Eywa "the Force" in the movie is not intelligent and personal as the Holy Spirit is. The religion of the Navi can be more likened to paganism. Worship of the creation rather than the Creator.
@sphynxalive Um...apparently you did not watch the movie. Your claim that Eywa is "not intelligent and personal" simply is not true. Eywa was clearly intelligent and capable of thought, as well as personal, both proven by the fact that she hears Jake Sully's prayer for help during the war.
@sphynxalive Furthermore, you reveal your ignorance when you say "The religion of the Navi can be more likened to paganism. " While paganism includes a broad spectrum of beliefs, many of which celebrate the earth, most pagans are polytheistic or atheist. NOT monotheistic, such as the Navi people with their Goddess Eywa. So considering that, the Navi religion and paganism truly do not involve "Worship of the creation rather than the Creator. "
The priest can make a pack of cackling hyenas out a beautiful unicorn running on the rainbow into space. I wouldn't recommend he give his input and insights to 15yr old kids about Avatars, they'd come out crying and weeping. I'm kidding, great perception Sir as always we enjoy your intellectual reactions.
After listening to the erudite priest I'll never see another movie the same way again. I was like a wide-eyed boy throwing popcorn in my mouth looking at the splendiferous world of Pandora in wonderment and awe.
Also i think it shows maybe the ancient vs the recent. I sometimes think theres this view that ancient people were stupid or dumb. And its like no they weren't. African people wore barely any clothing because where they live its very hot. Certain Native Americans didn't farm the land because they didn't need to they got all their resources from nuts, fruits, and animals. Also shown is a mirror of history and how this story has happened many times in the past.
Well I can appreciate this point of view as an agnostic myself. The way i see it tho is very for nature. See I think the Navi represent nature, people always like to say what u have that natures on Earth but god created the whole universe. Well the whole universe is nature. Stars, suprenovas, asteriods, comets,etc... thats all nature. I think this move shows the power of nature and how eas it is for nature to react to forces. Also it shows that people maybe should be more connected with nature.
@metalahhhhhhhhhhhh I don't think being connected with nature is a bad thing as long as you don't start worshipping it like the Navi in the movie. IT may be powerful but is still is a created force. It is a system not a being itself worthy of worship.
As an atheist, I don't believe in either forms of spirituality, but I do think Father Baron accurately describes the difference bt pantheism and theism. Disagree though that pantheism takes away anything important. He says it takes away from the mystery of a proclamative deity. The problem with proclamative religions is that all of them each proclaim that they know what God is proclaiming ...lol. I personally do feel " connected" in someway with nature as a species that has evolved
"Accessible but nonthreatening" in reference to Avatar's sort of spirituality was the best insight in my opinion. Although I am an inexperienced Christian, a similar mind state and consciousness that is presented in Avatar and The Alchemist has opened my eyes to a lot of things and what I feel are truths that I did not notice while still being a Christian. In your opinion, does it conflict with a person's Christianity to also hold this sort of spirituality?
I was so glad to hear a more open-minded and objective opinion about the "spirituality" displayed in Avatar. There are many religious people on YouTube, saying the most absurd and pushy things to people. They are almost vile while speaking of God, because they act like they're speaking for God. lol. I'm an agnostic. This means, I'm spiritual, but I really can't choose any religion to follow. And, I'm glad about that.
Say aliens came to Earth and they knew the absolute truth. Would we listen?
If god is accessible why the hell doesn't he answer prayers. If god exist- which I don't believe- he doesn't care much for people- at least not beyond giving them life and the air to breath. In fact, it seems some of the greatest joys god provides are forbidden by him. Certainly not a nice god, if nothing else.
@Ebuverthebicepcurler Does a good parent give his child absolutely everything he asks for? And doesn't a good parent sometimes prevent his child from over-indulging in certain joys? Jesus consistently called God "father." If you stay with that analogy, a lot of your questions will be answered.
Right, if god was a good father why give us those opportunities- exactly the question I asked! Really, this free will is a horrible gift if it can land us in hell. If god exist he either hates people or doesn't give a sh--.
@Ebuver Firstly, any biblical reference to hell is so vague that it is a subject of much scholarly debate as to whether a place of eternal suffering was ever inferred. Secondly, let's follow Padre's parent example. As a parent, I gave my child free will that at times resulted in scrapes and bruises, from which she learned and grew. However, with superior knowledge, I set loving limits on her free will, and did not allow her to play on the freeway. Has God not more love and knowledge than I?
@pisumalu God has infinite love and knowledge, but God can't suspend our free will, unless he wants us to be puppets. Despite all of a parent's loving concern, her child could, in principle, reject that love. To reject the divine love, from the deepest center of one's being, is to enter the state designated by the symbolic language of Hell.
@Word ~ Of course God would not suspend free will. Like a child who feels abandoned and threatened while in fact safe in their bed, we too are free to imagine ourselves to be separate from God's Love. Though "hellish", imagining thus does not make it so. It does not change our Divine source, that God's Kingdom is within us, nor that "with God, all things are possible". Infinite knowledge and love are just that, infinite. This is beyond the human mind's capacity to understand or explain.
sounds like man perceiving god in his own image. only one who separates himself from the energies of nature views them as "some vague backdrop to life". they are life.
but i understand your perspective here. it's scarier to think of god as a universal force present in all things and not a "person" who coddles you above others and "chooses" you, soothing the insecurities of your ego.
@gtoure Oh brother! God's personhood is a function of God's ontological perfection. It means that he's possessed of intellect and will. And if you think this means he "coddles" human beings, I would recommend a thorough reading of the Bible!
thank you for responding, father. your definition of "personhood" defies common use; perhaps a different term is needed. but even in different terms, the issue is the concept. you individualize god in a way that serves your ego and justifies your position. you even address god as "he", a singular, masculine pronoun while conceptually, god is neither. not being argumentative; i welcome your explanation.
@gtoure How does it defy common use? A person is someone endowed with intellect, will, and freedom. What do you think a person is? And in point of fact, I'm not "individualizing" God if by that you mean that I'm turning God into a particular being. God is not one being among many; but rather the sheer act of to-be itself. Now the sheer act of to-be itself must be possessed of every ontological perfection, and that means he is a person.
with all due respect sir, i recommend a thorough reading of the dictionary. the primary definitions for "person" are "human" and "individual", singular terms that individualize and humanize. as does the pronoun "he". also, one can have no discernible intellect, will or freedom and still be a "person". a human embryo, for example.
i can dig your explanation of god as an "act". since an "act" is essentially a change from inaction to action, i suppose you agree with the theory that god is change.
@gtoure I'm operating out of Boethius's definition of person as "an instance of a rational nature." On this reading, humans are indeed persons, but they don't exhaust the category, for there are spiritual persons as well. When I speak of God as pure act, I don't imply any change in God. I mean that he is utterly actualized, perfect in being.
also; you focused on my use of the word "coddles" and missed my point. you did not address the separation from nature nor the concept of god's omnipresence and universal equality.
@witchwild To be a person is to be endowed with intellect, will, and freedom. It doesn't necessarily imply embodiment. God, who is a spirit, is not living in a "place;" so it would be difficult to "hang out" with him. I might recommend, however, prayer.
'Person' also means a 'Corporate Body', as in, 'they found the papers on 'her person'. Even our 'personalities' are *physical* attributes. Our soul, on the other hand, is our inner being, our essense, our spirit. I would never pray to a 'person'.
When I pray I connect to my Deity on a deeply emotional level, fully focussed & aware I'm bonding my with the Divine Spirit. She is me & I am Her. Spiritually, speaking. When I finish praying the Spiritual Light of the Goddess still surrounds me with Her Love but I am an individual 'Person', a carnal being, a mere novice working towards *becoming* a Being of Light, whereas She is Divinity & She IS the Light!
Ooop, Father! Forgot to mention I'm a Pagan Priestess! ;-)
@witchwild Well, I gathered as much! What you're describing I would characterize as a mystical communion with nature. When I speak of prayer, I always mean a communion of persons, a contact between a human being and the God who knows us better than we know ourselves.
Father, I don't think we'll ever agree on this subject. Yet to me, yor prayer & my prayer is not that different-just you connect with a male God whom u resonate with, & I pray to a Goddess whom I resonate with. Religion is a very personal thing. We all have our own little 'rules & rituals' that are good for each one of us individually. Guess we humans shud just respect each others religions & not try to 'change or judge' one another's beliefs. Very sorry for my rudeness earlier on in my posts.
Fr. Barron is a cool priest. Well they all are (minus any pedophiles) but he is cool
SkyBoy937 2 days ago
Entertaining movie. Beyond that, what is there to speculate upon? Nothing.
JeffersonDinedAlone 1 week ago
You know whats interesting? The mother-nature-force-thing in the movie is called Ehywah, which is kind of an anagram of the word Yahweh
mattd259 3 weeks ago
I actually really enjoyed Avatar for the wonderful world it depicts (of course) but indeed also because of the depiction of spirituality in it and the contrast of a spiritual, nature-loving people vs. a cold, mechanical, technological world. And yes, the fact that for once the good guys are religious in some way, I find really refreshing today. Yes, the political ideas are pretty black&white, but at least for once we get a beautiful, exciting film with something positive to say about faith.
Audioepics 1 month ago
This video is popular on Indonesia
rafaelsalinas58 1 month ago
God bless you, Fr. Barron, you are so clear and concise and yet, so profound. Let the Holy Ghost continues to enlighten your mind to spread His word.
Cristinact 2 months ago
This video is a favorite on Kingston
roycestevens37 2 months ago
Avatar is really more of an odd cartoon parody of nature mysticism. The whole premise of this predominately digital film is a man downloading his consciousness into an empty biological machine that comes with a built-in USB cable which jacks into a planet-wide fibre-optic network, allowing him to pwn n00bs with his gaming skills. My last hike in the mountains was not like this. It's a supposed allegory of nature for the computer age, environmentalism for people who don't go outside.
CoryTheRaven 2 months ago
Oh, and it seems to me that movies like Avatar and Dances With Wolves are basically just leftist Hollywood rolling in some white guilt. How sad.
ladylejean215 2 months ago
Would this be non-catholic?
1. Nature in some way reflects God (basic cause and effect thinking)
2. The more we look, the more we can sense God's presence in nature (the Mind behind its mechanics).
3. Therefore, the natural world can become a material manifestation of God's presence, while still remaining the natural world and, thus, fundamentally different than God. Yet, in some way, reflects the Presence of the Divine?
Would this be heresy?
AZ0960036 2 months ago
@AZ0960036 Sure, that would be fine.
wordonfirevideo 2 months ago
Fr. Barron is very well spoken. Very well said indeed.
adonelahi 5 months ago
Avatar supports the demonic cause. Demons against humans. Fallen angel human hybrids. The blue skinned demons are from my pagan background - celtic. Once saved, I was shocked to find that God was a 'person'. I was now accountable, afraid, in relationship. I was no longer a little god, tapping into an impersonal force. I was eye to eye, heart to heart, spirit to spirit with my creator.
voyagersystem 5 months ago
I once was asked to describe the Holy Spirit to a young woman with a fairly secular background with another young woman who was a Pastor's daughter. I simply said, "It's kind of like the Force," at which point the Pastor's daughter chymed in, "Yes, It's a lot like that."
I think that provides something of a tacit statement about the condition of our society...lol
TSLittleMermaid 7 months ago
Hollywood now caters to the WORLD not just christian world.
330MillionGods 7 months ago
I love how I not only hear Father Barron's nviews on different topics, but that I also learn a few things. :)
LucyGoozie 8 months ago
Maybe Hollywood doesn't accept your view of God because that view is ridiculous; a being that we have no proof even exists yet still has an impact on the world.
Blarghonius 8 months ago in playlist Philosophy-Religion
Fr. I think you are limiting what God is 'The Holy Spirit the giver of life' God is not only the creator of the universe, he is 'the word' that you speak of in the form of Jesus and he is also the avatar nature spirituality in the form of the Holy Spirit . God not only created the Universe, he is an integral part of it. God is the beginning and end of all things.
mhoowen 9 months ago
Comment removed
EMovroydis1 9 months ago
@EMovroydis1 To understand why, take a look at Mark 6:20.
wordonfirevideo 9 months ago
Comment removed
EMovroydis1 9 months ago
Comment removed
EMovroydis1 9 months ago
Some movies have a theme strung into them. A Man Called Horse, Dancing with Wolfs, and now Avatar are, I think, have a anti materialsm theme. Or materialsim = civilization.
vkorchnoifan 10 months ago
So your saying you know exactly what God is and that the Bible would call the energy of the earth a creature ? I thought the Bible cleary states that we will never fully know what God is or his meaning, but it's funny how you know what he is and his meaning in your video here. How humble you are sir lol. Maybe you should write a new version of the Bible or add a couple of books to it like everyone else in the history of religion seems to do ? Who knows
TheDanimal1983 11 months ago
I mean most popular republicans are fear mongers...
dawgpost90 11 months ago
Father,
I've always been interested in the concept of religion and aliens, but one of the things I found interesting it's depiction of technology. Aliens are typically portrayed as thousands of years ahead of Earth, but in "Avatar", the humans are technologically advanced, and the Na'vi are about on par with American Indians in the 17th century. I don't see there being a mutual exclusivity between technology (science) and spirituality (religion), but do you see an underlying message of that?
JRserver 1 year ago
@JRserver One historical observation is that native American cultures like the Incas and Aztecs were overwhelmed by technologically superior european powers at the time. An important consequences of this was that European religion came to dominate over indigenous religion. The religions of our native cultures are really just accidents of history and Christianity is no exception. Perhaps if the Mayans had been ahead of us and colonized Europe we would all now be worshiping Queztacotal, who knows.
Gazzar 9 months ago
Thank you, Father, for this commentary! I've been telling my friends ever since I saw this when it came out that it's a great movie despite all the talk against it. As long as you aren't easily fooled by the anti-Catholic concepts, it's quite possible to be very entertained by this highly visually stimulating movie.
mdlagreca 1 year ago
I actually find the religions that have that mystical power that lives within all things to be much more loving and far more beautiful than anything from the Abrahamic faiths.
May my ancestors watch over and guide me.
FollowerOfTheGods 1 year ago
1) From Wikipedia: "In a 2007 interview with Time magazine, Cameron was asked about the meaning of the term avatar, to which he replied, 'It's an incarnation of one of the Hindu gods taking a flesh form. In this film what that means is that the human technology in the future is capable of injecting a human's intelligence into a remotely located body, a biological body.'"
PrimalRhythm 1 year ago
2) What is interesting is that in ancient paintings, you can find the Hindu god Krishna (an avatar) painted blue. I wonder if that might be where Cameron got the idea for the blue Na'vi people.
PrimalRhythm 1 year ago
I am a protestant and I likeFr. Barron and his views!
ETworldjone 1 year ago 15
@ETworldjone I'm atheist and I like Fr Barron but I don't agree on his views, but it's still enjoyable to listen to him talking.
Axcalzia 1 year ago
@ETworldjone That's Good!
adonelahi 5 months ago
The Navi have similarities to the original inhabitants of Turtle Island, as they called it, before the greatest genocide in the history of the world devastated them, and one aspect of that genocide was the inevitable "It's of the Devil" comments of priests whenever Native Americans performed their rituals or their shaman sought visions, whatever - it was always "Devil," and my sympathies are not with the priests here. They were too certain, and too disrespectful of a spirituality not their own.
not2tees 1 year ago
@not2tees That may be the case of some ultra-hard priests, but the Catholic Church has clarified its viewpoint on other religions already. Such as in the person of soon-to-be Blessed Pope John Paul II, wherein he is seen mingling with tribal leaders and watching these dances and rituals performed in St. Peter's. He is reaching out, much like a missionary, to these people of different faith. So I cannot say that the Church is disrespectful of a spirituality not its own.
studentquestor 1 year ago
@not2tees Pope Benedict added to this, when he emphasized religious freedom in his recent addresses, especially in the light of church bombings of persecution. True, the Catholic doctrine holds that anything not of God is not of God, but the Church has softened its position since Vatican II. Now, a more "pastoral" instead of a "doctrinal" approach is applied to missionary work among people of different faiths. The Church does not judge entire peoples by their physical and outward rituals.
studentquestor 1 year ago
They go "prove god, show me god", then when someone says "here it is", then why dont accept it? nobody ever wants to accept it. Just like a child asks his mother "who's my father?", and the mother says "HE is your father", wont you believe your mother? The nature is the mother. The golden mean proportion, its all around you, in all forms, phi, that is intelligence.. I think it's time to grow up and just look at the facts. Quantum physics.
EsuDalyvis 1 year ago
@EsuDalyvis I agree. Nonbelievers often circumvent the evidence presented to them, because they don't want to be humble enough that they have found the Truth. Faith requires surrender, which requires humility. They're afraid of this moral direction steering their lives. This can also be their reason of why they left our their religions. They want to be independent.
studentquestor 1 year ago
i can't prove that jesus existed. for that matter i can't prove that everything isn't just an illusion. all i really know is that i seem to be having a conscious experience. I like to believe that Jesus existed and that I am loved.
bthegood 1 year ago
"god" personally speaks and acts? hmmm, well it seems to me that "god" has never shown himself or helped anyone EVER, and im not talking about someones story of "god" thats like " my mom was sick, she was dieing and doctors said she only had 1 day left.. every one prayed and blah blah blah, A FUCKING MIRACLE, "GOD" HAS HEALED HER", but the thing is, did "god" heal her or did medicine.. there is no "god", use your brain. we evolved so we could have the power of knowledge, NOW FUCKING USE IT.
RockLIFE001 1 year ago
@RockLIFE001 u can not know taht god doesnt exist, because u doubt, people who belive know that their is one. regarding the evidence- have u evev heard of fatima, lourdes, medjugorje, padre pio and many more, read about it first then make insulting statemants
livno211 1 year ago
@livno211 I agree. Saying God doesn't exist is a very arrogant statement. So you can transcend God in His knowledge? You can know more about God? These evidences are good, but for a solid nonbeliever, I suggest more general and basic proofs. Try reading St. Thomas Aquinas, Blaise Pascal and CS Lewis on their proofs on God.
studentquestor 1 year ago
fantasy universe, wow.. i lold when he said that, its not a universe, its a planet.
RockLIFE001 1 year ago
@3rosesred No, I usually just wear street clothes when I see movies.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo Far be it from me to tell you how to dress, but I like seeing the clerical orders!
BalladoftheWindfish 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo Have you seen Zeitgest movie? would like to hear your critics on that, but try be rational, if it is possible.
pint047 1 year ago
@pint047 I know; I know: we religious types have such a tough time being rational. Take a look at my video on Zeitgeist, which has been up for about a year.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago 3
@wordonfirevideo What if there were someone there who could use talking to a priest but did not have the guts, enough willingness or whatever to go to a church to find one?
Portoinfinitivo 4 months ago
Jesus taught non violence Jesus taught UNCONDITIONAL Love Jesus said these things I do you can also do, Jesus said if you had the faith the size of a mustard seed you could tell that mountain to move. Jesus wasn't religious and, father you seem like a very nice and sincere man, but I don't think Jesus is Catholic. Why is it assumed that spirituality is religion. "Just war" is an oxymoron. Turn the other cheek.
bthegood 1 year ago
@bthegood "Jesus" never existed.. now, before you tell me he did.. present me with some evidence of his existance.. ohh yea, and the bible is not a reliable source to obtain that information im waiting for you to present to me.
RockLIFE001 1 year ago
@RockLIFE001 If one doesn't admit the historical significance of the Bible, in a debate, he makes his ignorance public.
8TBALL 1 year ago
@RockLIFE001 Don't wait. Search out and find the information by yourself. Don't sit and wish that things would just appear like magic. Jesus, God, doesn't work that way. "Seek and you will find". Put yourself in this disposition. You will not find if you will not seek.
studentquestor 1 year ago
@3rosesred Thomas Aquinas developed a just war doctrine. In it it is possible to defend your loved ones in a just war with strict conditions for it to be just. It is also possible to defend self or others. However, Christianity neither intended to be spread by coercion or violence or means to advocate any violence - far from it Christ was (is) anti-violent in an active way. Look at Pope John Paul IIs call NOT to start the war in Iraq. He predicted that it would lead to prolonged suffering.
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
Religion = a human beings attempt to know its true nature.
Psychatron 1 year ago
whats interesting is that many liberals are very tolerant of paganism. But take a sharp 360 turn when it comes to christianity or other abrahamic religions.
CreedChrist 1 year ago
@CreedChrist That's because Pagans don't shove their religions down our throats or wage holy wars like abrahamic followers do.
CamillaCalamity 1 year ago
@CamillaCalamity That really is an ignorant comment. Read about the Pagan persecutions of Christians during the reign of emperor Nero and Trajan(apostolic era). Pagans feeding Christians in coliseums to lions and other ferocious beasts. Apparently the pagans had no problem shoving their religion down the throats of babies when they sacrificed them to Molech either. Or the Incas. Paganism led to enormous savagery.
CreedChrist 1 year ago
@CreedChrist Ignorant? Guess who owned the land before the Christians even existed. Pagans! Paganism in all its forms and denominations is the oldest religion in the world. When Christians and Muslims showed up of course there was violence. Do you expect people to just sit there while they're being taken over?
CamillaCalamity 1 year ago
@CamillaCalamity Pagan is a collective term for non-Jew/non-Christian (and non-Muslim). These people were not of uniform faith and they did not have denominations. They fought bitter wars and enjoyed gladiatoral fights to the death, pedophilia, infanticide, murder of entire families for any reason, slavery, sex orgies, religion and politics were intermixed - Emperor=god, etc. Chinese emperors would put entire armies to death when the emperor died to hide the location of the tomb. Nasty world.
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
@CamillaCalamity "That's because Pagans don't shove their religions down our throats or wage holy wars like abrahamic followers do."
Yeah that is pretty key right there. There's just something repulsive about Zealots who seek to convert everyone. I would rather go and ask wisdom from someone who seems at peace with himself and his spirituality than someone who seems... politicized.
But I guess this is off topic :)
HarfangX 1 year ago
@HarfangX Well I don't know, pagans like Attila the Hun, Vikings and Genghis Khan murdered more people than a few Crusades which were political wars against the political spread of Islam. Pagan Aztecs and Mayans in Central/South America were also not so peaceful. Most conflicts are motivated by secular (non-Godly) reasons , such as money, power, race, ethnicity, land, resources, glory, etc. Surely you see that secularism is the driving force of most violence? Christianity is anti-violence.
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
@HarfangX"That's because Pagans don't shove their religions down our throats or wage holy wars like abrahamic followers do." Where do Christians shove their religion down your throat? The last time I came across an evangelising Christian was 12 years ago. In contrast secular humanism, is the religion of governments and Hollywood and we see it evangelised on many occasions. What's more, is that we have to pay to hear it. Who forced you to come here? Surely Fr Barron did not knock on your door?
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
@PuraguCryostato #1- Bare in mind you quoted something I quoted myself from someone else and agreed with. I don't mind attempting a defense though.
#2- Your definition of pagan is broader than mine. I'm going with Ft.Barron's and the context of the video.
#3- Wikipedia lists Attila's religious beliefs as unknown.
HarfangX 1 year ago
@HarfangX "The Christianized Romans could not understand how God could allow these pagans to destroy their once-mighty empire; they called Attila the "Scourge of God."" Look at Asianhistory.about.com - there is much info about Attila. These guys were pagan and they were bloodthirsty. The Huns came from Asia. They were most definitely pagans. They initially caused mayhem and death in China. Then across Scythia and finally Europe. They also fought amongst each other. Nasty lot.
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
@PuraguCryostato I honestly think you're using a quote I made from another comment as a launch pad for your own debate, which relates in no way to what I said. You focus on the war aspect from the quote when my response to it was about the expansionist nature of the church.
Until you're actually willing to talk to me... you'll have that debate alone.
HarfangX 1 year ago
@HarfangX Do you agree with my points or not? If not, please explain why.
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
@HarfangX You agreed to the comment made by someone else about religious wars. You alluded to the fact that pagans were somehow gentle and non violent or perhaps you only care about peoples' motivations in fighting wars.Pagan Nero (and others) murdered Christians because they were Christian. I also pointed out that any Christian cruelty would most of the time be motivated by imperialist desires-such as increase in land, resources, prestige, wealth,etc. by rulers who were not centered on Christ.
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
@PuraguCryostato
#4- To my knowledge there is absolutely no reason to believe the Viking expensionism was driven by the desire to impose their religion on others... on theory even has it as a reaction to Charlemagne who "used force and terror to Christianize all pagans" and that this was backlash for it.
#5- Not gonna bother researching Mayans, at this point I think you're throwing things out to see what sticks.
HarfangX 1 year ago
@HarfangX #4. Whatever the reasons for Viking pillaging were they resulted in violence and death. Christianity is an anti-violent faith. It makes people more moderate. In this light Christian vikings were less cruel then their pagan ancestors. BTW according to Viking mythology a warrior who died in battle ate at Valhalla. Charlamagne helped unite France which resulted in the beginning of European civilisation. Without him, Europe would no doubt be Muslim and you wouldn't have a PC to type on.
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
@PuraguCryostato
#6- If you're gonna serve me the same old "Non-christian world" evils vs Christian evils and which is worst I'm not interested... I don't want any evils and you're off topic... which is "Religious expansionism", or perhaps... Secular anti-religious movements...
#7- Just take the highly politicized Evangelicals, Fundamentalist and Mormons imposing their views, like for prop-8 in California & the amount of out of state money and protesters that came in from Utah and Texas.
HarfangX 1 year ago
@HarfangX I want you to realise that the world was not peaceful and rosy before Christianity, that's all. Christianity is ACTIVELY anti violent at its core, pagan beliefs were at best neutral towards violence. Pagans pillaged and fought against each other more than Christians. The early Christian European kings were pagans but merely Christian in name only. The unification of Europe into nation states was driven by the Christian Church. We now have the European Union because of that. Thanks.
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
@HarfangX #7, I'm not American so I can't comment on Prop-8. However, the way I see it is that both sides actively transport in supporters and use any means necessary to get their views across. The left in America has an advantage in that Hollywood, most news outlets and most colleges tow the Leftist view, while the Right has an advantage amongst the groups you mentioned and uses churches to help raise support for their views. I don't however see Evangelicals forcing you to become Xtian.
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
@HarfangX I also want to reiterate this point: despite the fact that nasty things happened throughout history Christianity is actively anti-violent. It may have been hijacked sometimes but the motivations for its hijacking and violence were almost always imperial in nature (ie secular). The last time I checked Jesus did not instruct His followers to conquer an empire for Him, the apostles were to shake the dust off their sandals and leave towns which rejected them, not lay siege. Thank you. :-)
PuraguCryostato 1 year ago
Ok. What is to be "Pagan"? You worship something that is not any one god?? LOL. If so, let me tell you that Eywa is one god that the Na'vi worship, But, their god or goddess is also everywhere. Why is that bad?
LukeLovesRose 1 year ago
@LukeLovesRose Paganism is essentially a form of nature worship. The true God is the creator of Nature but not reducible to it.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago 16
@wordonfirevideo Agree. If so, our God would be like the God(s) of Eastern mystics: present in all, passive, esoteric, and with no notion of Hell.
studentquestor 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo I'd say (after having spent a number of years among them) that NEO-paganism is nature worship, but that definition only goes back to the early 1900s. I'd say that CLASSICAL paganism, the kind that the Jews would have encountered among the Greeks and Romans centuries ago, had more to do with ancestry, your "gens" or your people, who your family is, etc. If that makes sense. I don't see almost any connection to classical paganism among neo-pagans at ALL; most disdain history.
ladylejean215 5 months ago
Fr. Barron says: "God is a transcendent power, who has created the whole universe, and who personally speaks and acts."
By using the verb "is," Fr. Barron is positing that he Knows what he says to be Absolute Truth. He Knows God is a transcendent power. He Knows He has created the universe. He knows God is a Being who personally speaks and acts. I don't believe this to be Truth. Fr. Barron believes God is a transcendent power. He believes God created the universe. He believes God is a Being...
BMac279 1 year ago
who personally speaks and acts. It is important to draw a distinction between what Fr. Barron believes to be Absolute Truth -- that God exists as transcendent power, as One who created the universe, and as one who personally speaks and acts -- and what is Absolute Truth.
I especially loved the part where Fr. Barron talked about "the kind of religion that Hollywood finds acceptable," speaking down to it and describing it as a lesser attitude towards spirituality.
BMac279 1 year ago
This film looked MUCH better in 2D.
Raymint 1 year ago
Exactly! Nobody will ever fear the "force," in the Biblical sense. And the "force" will never draw anybody in a personal sense. Haven't seen the film but interested in what you think of the heavy "transhumanist" theme throughout?
caveatemp 1 year ago
I have a comment and I hope you respond... The reason I watched this particular movie was because everyone said how good it was, so I checked out DecentFilms to make sure I wasn't going in for something I would regret. What bothers me is that nobody--not even you--mentioned the pornographic scene, and I had no warning. It confuses me that with all its flaws (and especially this particular one) you still promote it.
jayreiacira 1 year ago
@jayreiacira Well first, friend, I'm hardly "promoting" it; I was sharply critical of it in my review. And second, I'm not sure which scene you're referring to. I didn't see anything particularly "pornographic" in Avatar.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo Jayreiacira is referencing the scene that follows Jake Sully and Natiri choosing each other.
RainBirdLori 1 year ago
Lets not try the trick of guilt through association. Yes, Pantheist belief is popular in Hollywood; but it was also the belief of the Stoics. I have genuine awe for the universe; I don't know anyone who can look out on a star filled night contemplating the vast distances and vast size of the universe without being struck by the beauty and Majesty of the universe. Let's not try to borrow that feeling to support a personal god with exactly zero evidence.
cheetah100 1 year ago
@cheetah100 The question to ask is "where did that Beauty and that Majesty come from?" We know that the universe is not self-explanatory, for it is marked in every detail by contingency. So who endowed it with such impressive qualities?
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo Beauty and that Majesty is a judgment we make. It is like asking where numbers come from. It was I who endowed it with Majesty because it was my judgment, The question is "why do you feel you know the answer?"
cheetah100 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo and where did your god come from?
exactly...
Darusdei 1 year ago
@Darusdei God could not be God if he came from anything. Jesus and the Holy Ghost proceed from the Father, of course, but that's different than the "come from" you mean.
benabaxter 1 year ago
@benabaxter and what makes you think that the universe we call reality hasn't always been there?
Darusdei 1 year ago
@Darusdei Whether it's always been there is beside the point. What matters is that it is nothing but a congeries of contingent things--and hence it needs an explanation. The universe is non-self-sufficient.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo Sorry i just don't see it very logical to just jump from that to "god did it"
Darusdei 1 year ago
@Darusdei What I'm arguing is that contingency has to be grounded, finally, in some reality which is radically non-contingent, unconditioned. This is what I mean by "God." I'm not pulling God into the discussion arbitrarily; I'm arguing for his existence on logical grounds.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
Nice point. As Sigourney Weaver's character shows - 'Ewa' is in the biology, it's measurable; the Navi actually have their god's telephone number, and Yoda can raise X-wings from swamps without using wires. In the UK, Jedi has been listed as an official religion for about ten years, I think. Who knows, in a thousand years' time Obi-Wan Kenobi might have replaced Mohammed!
rorshak73 1 year ago
AVATAR PARA MI ES UN FILM PANDEISMO "TODO ES DIOS" "LA NATURALEZA ES DIOS" PERO SEPUEDE APLICAR A LA INVASION DE USA A LOS ARABES QUE VAN CONTRA SU CULTURA!!! Y ESO HAY QUE RESPETARLO Y ORIENTARLO AL VERDADERO DIOS ALLAH!!EL MISERICORDIOSO Y NO SOLO LA NATURALEZA QUE ES LA HIPOTESIS DE GREENPEACE.
kantu0220 1 year ago
they don't really have a religion.. its safer to say that they're pantheistic.
desicuellar 1 year ago
when a person says to 'be aware' it means 'dont follow it or i'll spank you' ultimately i liked this guys approach to it, but take in the spirituality of any film with a story like this. it's all that it is; the notion of spirituality. hollywood just re-uses an age old take on it.
halfbreed1426 1 year ago
I watched the movie several times. One thing I saw about the relationship with their God was one I think many people as Christians can learn was the Na'vi appeared to have a childlike faith and trust in their God. They didn't appear to make God into an aggreeable "genie" figure which acts when we say. Often people make it so that God says something, but it is really their own thoughts. The Na'vi seemed to allow their God to act in it's own will and trust that what their God does is....
Stitchman3875 1 year ago
@Stitchman3875 in the best interest of all his creation. As a Catholic, this is something I tend to struggle with from time to time. So I do see some lessons we can learn from the spirituality of the film.
Stitchman3875 1 year ago
oh my goodness, that music is so amazing
HeyMrKindred 1 year ago
It is funny to mark God as a person, in a human way. Why? Because, human personality have certain limits, human mind and intellect too. When God, throughout history, talks with man, he is doing it in a a way which is understandable to us, as person to person. That does not mean that God is person in our way of meaning. It would be honest to say: nobody (except few people, maybe) knows about nature of God, and nobody will ever know all. So, there is no way to tell which religion is better
zkmplayer 1 year ago
@zkmplayer Hello. You are correct when you say God is not a person in our way of meaning, and also when nobody will ever know all of God's nature (for He is infinite, thus nobody can fully know Him except Himself). But it does not logically follow that there is no way to tell which religion is better. If God chose to reveal Himself and His nature in a way humans can understand, in Moses, the prophets, or Jesus Christ, then we can tell which religion is "better." God bless you.
richgr1123 1 year ago
@richgr1123 You are using evidence based on one book (in this case Bible) and tradition and maybe dogmatic theology. That is not enough- other religions also have their holy books, tradition and teachings. So your opinion is based on your belief, and logically you can not say that Christianity is better than other religions.
zkmplayer 1 year ago
I notice a lot of people commenting on here have lost sight of the fact that Father Barron is talking about the Biblical God. And he makes that very clear in his video - in fact, he makes this very clear in all of his videos. He states it directlly. So many people are offering New Age type of gods and spiritualities, but it's not the Biblical God or Christian spirituality. Don't expect Father Barron to get New Age on you. Not gonna happen. He's a Roman Catholic priest. Period.
chalicechiq 1 year ago
Father, let me ask you a question about Pope John Paul II: didn't he offer an apology some years back, to peoples who have been hurt by the Church over the centuries? How did you personally feel about that? Is it right for the Church to humble itself in that way? And I think of how the white people, when coming to the US, treated the natives - it wasn't good. Was it really necessary to have their culture wiped out? Do you see what I mean? Please enlighten.
chalicechiq 1 year ago
Father,very well said.
jhansen1441 1 year ago
last thought "hollywood spirituality" that movie wasn't suppose to create religion at all, you christians get mad at harry potter for having magic thats power of gods or something, next thing you know your going to get mad at toy story 3 for saying toys are living things and your going to accuse people of thinking toys can really talk....
mattcostarules 1 year ago
and "GOD" doesn't talk to you , they just wrote they talk to you....... the only people who still believe god talks to them are the mormons who have 20 wifes each....
mattcostarules 1 year ago
Doesn't the bible say the atonement was only for white people or something... and the bible tells people to kill people who aren't white and take their land........ i thought christians h8ed avatar because the white people don't kill all the avatar, christians killed the indians because they weren't christian...... so i thought christians wanted the avatar to die because they weren't christian..... christians are just racist A-holes.....
mattcostarules 1 year ago
The movie had nothing to do with Christian god concepts. There is no similarity. Good comparison with 'The Force' though.
matthewtaylorbrown 1 year ago
If the Biblical God is believed to have created all in existence, wouldn't you believe that Him, being the Source of the Universe, would be imminent in all his creation seeing as he is connected to it?If I would better connect to God in the form of the natural world, would you not believe the God would show himself in the form of a plant or animal?Example:God revealed himself to Moses in the form of a burning bush.So why not the Giant Tree of the Na'vi, or the jellyfish-like floating creatures?
GooglyBee23 1 year ago
@GooglyBee23 The true God is indeed immanent to the world, but he is not reducible to it. His immanence is in tension with his radical transcendence to what he has made. The tradition catches this by referring to God as ipsum esse subsistens, the sheer act of to-be itself.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo I don't believe it's so black and white as a maker creating his inventions and letting them be. I believe the maker infuses the creation with the use of their own energy and tools, thus any creature ever in existence will always be an extension of the maker. Meaning anything in nature, whether it be humans, or animals, or plants. If not, then how can us humans be so closely connected to a being so imminent from us? Maybe as another being God may bear his/her own conscience mind,
GooglyBee23 1 year ago
@GooglyBee23 No! Creatures are not, in any sense, "extensions" of God. They exist in radical distinction from their creator, even as they depend upon God every moment.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago 8
@wordonfirevideo I believe differently. I believe we are all of the same source, and that we are all extensions of each other, as well as any other energy existing in this infinite Universe of ours. You are me, had I been you. And I am you, had you been me. Get it? You are me had I been born you and become a priest in Christianity. And I am you, had you been born in my position and become a Pagan.
GooglyBee23 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo Either way,both our beliefs reflect much of our individual spirituality, and since both are different, there may never be a time when we will agree upon this topic.Which is fine with me;I'd rather all have their individual thoughts on an issue and than be robots & all think exactly alike. There are many other ways to express an agreement on something, and I don't think religion is one of them. As I was once told before, "Acknowledge our differences. Celebrate our similarities."
GooglyBee23 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo but being made from the maker(s), I believe we share more in common with God than humans give credit. I believe it to be a "web of life", one strand being affected by another strand, and all linked to the center-point of the web; all made of the same material as the center; the center being it's own "transcendence" as the 'center' of the web, but imminent unto the web as a whole
GooglyBee23 1 year ago
@GooglyBee23 All of that is fine, as long as you stress, with equal emphasis, the radical otherness of God. God is both immanent and transcendent. False spiritualities and theologies give us an either/or in this regard.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
@wordonfirevideo Well, I'm glad we can both agree on something^_^
GooglyBee23 1 year ago
Firstly, the views in this movie are not religious;religion is somethin constructed by the human mind.Their practices are a part of their culture,the way they live, not "a daily practice".Secondly, the belief is that this Great Mother being is not only imminent in all things,but is also transcendent.Who is to judge a being that is believed to have created the Universe.Even the Bible does tell all of what or who God is.Who is to say that this Maternal being cannot be both imminent & transcendent?
GooglyBee23 1 year ago
Critical distinction though: The Na'vi religion works. (Or did it?).
Escape2SagaCity 1 year ago
Avatar is another word for incarnation. Jake Sully has 2 natures: a human nature and a Navi nature. He is paralyzed from the waist down, but at the same time he can run and hunt with the Navi. Similarly, God is omnipotent and omniscient, but in the person of Jesus Christ he suffers and takes upon himself our human experiences of anxiety, sadness, loneliness, and betrayal. It's sort of the mirror-image of what Christ did, though, because he was selfish and screwed things up for the Navi.
Jugglable 1 year ago
Excellent commentary By Fr. Baron on Avatar. I had the same view of the movie after watching it in 3D.
sphynxalive 1 year ago
LOTR kicks ass. so does avatar. atheist
LiSrD 1 year ago
The Lord of the Rings is a fully realised imaginative world as well :)
Norwegian Catholic
Olufff 1 year ago
@Olufff I said so. My line, I think, was "even more than Lord of the Rings, Avatar is a fully realized imaginative world." That assumes that the Lord of the Rings was indeed such a world. I just thought that Avatar was more so.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
Fr. Barron,
Could "the deep background energy of all things" possibly be interpreted as the creative activity of the Holy Spirit in the world? I ask this question in humility and in curiosity, and not with the intention of challenging the Biblical worldview or proposing a new doctrine. Peace, Irish Catholic
1r1shCath0l1c 1 year ago
@1r1shCath0l1c I'm afraid not. Whatever that "energy" is, it's a creature because it's contingent.
wordonfirevideo 1 year ago
@1r1shCath0l1c No it can't be looked at as the Holy Spirit. You surrender to the Holy Spirit so that God can use you not the other way around. Eywa "the Force" in the movie is not intelligent and personal as the Holy Spirit is. The religion of the Navi can be more likened to paganism. Worship of the creation rather than the Creator.
sphynxalive 1 year ago
@sphynxalive Um...apparently you did not watch the movie. Your claim that Eywa is "not intelligent and personal" simply is not true. Eywa was clearly intelligent and capable of thought, as well as personal, both proven by the fact that she hears Jake Sully's prayer for help during the war.
0neDomino 1 year ago
@sphynxalive Furthermore, you reveal your ignorance when you say "The religion of the Navi can be more likened to paganism. " While paganism includes a broad spectrum of beliefs, many of which celebrate the earth, most pagans are polytheistic or atheist. NOT monotheistic, such as the Navi people with their Goddess Eywa. So considering that, the Navi religion and paganism truly do not involve "Worship of the creation rather than the Creator. "
0neDomino 1 year ago
The priest can make a pack of cackling hyenas out a beautiful unicorn running on the rainbow into space. I wouldn't recommend he give his input and insights to 15yr old kids about Avatars, they'd come out crying and weeping. I'm kidding, great perception Sir as always we enjoy your intellectual reactions.
BadaBingBadaBoom012 1 year ago
After listening to the erudite priest I'll never see another movie the same way again. I was like a wide-eyed boy throwing popcorn in my mouth looking at the splendiferous world of Pandora in wonderment and awe.
BadaBingBadaBoom012 1 year ago
@BadaBingBadaBoom012 Wake up buddy :) Good things don't come easy.
sphynxalive 1 year ago
Also i think it shows maybe the ancient vs the recent. I sometimes think theres this view that ancient people were stupid or dumb. And its like no they weren't. African people wore barely any clothing because where they live its very hot. Certain Native Americans didn't farm the land because they didn't need to they got all their resources from nuts, fruits, and animals. Also shown is a mirror of history and how this story has happened many times in the past.
metalahhhhhhhhhhhh 1 year ago
Well I can appreciate this point of view as an agnostic myself. The way i see it tho is very for nature. See I think the Navi represent nature, people always like to say what u have that natures on Earth but god created the whole universe. Well the whole universe is nature. Stars, suprenovas, asteriods, comets,etc... thats all nature. I think this move shows the power of nature and how eas it is for nature to react to forces. Also it shows that people maybe should be more connected with nature.
metalahhhhhhhhhhhh 1 year ago
@metalahhhhhhhhhhhh I don't think being connected with nature is a bad thing as long as you don't start worshipping it like the Navi in the movie. IT may be powerful but is still is a created force. It is a system not a being itself worthy of worship.
sphynxalive 1 year ago
As an atheist, I don't believe in either forms of spirituality, but I do think Father Baron accurately describes the difference bt pantheism and theism. Disagree though that pantheism takes away anything important. He says it takes away from the mystery of a proclamative deity. The problem with proclamative religions is that all of them each proclaim that they know what God is proclaiming ...lol. I personally do feel " connected" in someway with nature as a species that has evolved
adstanra 1 year ago
"Accessible but nonthreatening" in reference to Avatar's sort of spirituality was the best insight in my opinion. Although I am an inexperienced Christian, a similar mind state and consciousness that is presented in Avatar and The Alchemist has opened my eyes to a lot of things and what I feel are truths that I did not notice while still being a Christian. In your opinion, does it conflict with a person's Christianity to also hold this sort of spirituality?
powderdd 2 years ago
I was so glad to hear a more open-minded and objective opinion about the "spirituality" displayed in Avatar. There are many religious people on YouTube, saying the most absurd and pushy things to people. They are almost vile while speaking of God, because they act like they're speaking for God. lol. I'm an agnostic. This means, I'm spiritual, but I really can't choose any religion to follow. And, I'm glad about that.
Say aliens came to Earth and they knew the absolute truth. Would we listen?
LukeLovesRose 2 years ago
If god is accessible why the hell doesn't he answer prayers. If god exist- which I don't believe- he doesn't care much for people- at least not beyond giving them life and the air to breath. In fact, it seems some of the greatest joys god provides are forbidden by him. Certainly not a nice god, if nothing else.
Ebuverthebicepcurler 2 years ago
@Ebuverthebicepcurler Does a good parent give his child absolutely everything he asks for? And doesn't a good parent sometimes prevent his child from over-indulging in certain joys? Jesus consistently called God "father." If you stay with that analogy, a lot of your questions will be answered.
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago 7
Right, if god was a good father why give us those opportunities- exactly the question I asked! Really, this free will is a horrible gift if it can land us in hell. If god exist he either hates people or doesn't give a sh--.
Ebuverthebicepcurler 2 years ago
@Ebuverthebicepcurler Well what precisely would you prefer: that we have no freedom? That we don't exist at all?
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago
@Ebuver Firstly, any biblical reference to hell is so vague that it is a subject of much scholarly debate as to whether a place of eternal suffering was ever inferred. Secondly, let's follow Padre's parent example. As a parent, I gave my child free will that at times resulted in scrapes and bruises, from which she learned and grew. However, with superior knowledge, I set loving limits on her free will, and did not allow her to play on the freeway. Has God not more love and knowledge than I?
pisumalu 2 years ago
@pisumalu God has infinite love and knowledge, but God can't suspend our free will, unless he wants us to be puppets. Despite all of a parent's loving concern, her child could, in principle, reject that love. To reject the divine love, from the deepest center of one's being, is to enter the state designated by the symbolic language of Hell.
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago
@Word ~ Of course God would not suspend free will. Like a child who feels abandoned and threatened while in fact safe in their bed, we too are free to imagine ourselves to be separate from God's Love. Though "hellish", imagining thus does not make it so. It does not change our Divine source, that God's Kingdom is within us, nor that "with God, all things are possible". Infinite knowledge and love are just that, infinite. This is beyond the human mind's capacity to understand or explain.
pisumalu 2 years ago
"God.. PERSONALLY speaks and acts"
sounds like man perceiving god in his own image. only one who separates himself from the energies of nature views them as "some vague backdrop to life". they are life.
but i understand your perspective here. it's scarier to think of god as a universal force present in all things and not a "person" who coddles you above others and "chooses" you, soothing the insecurities of your ego.
gtoure 2 years ago
@gtoure Oh brother! God's personhood is a function of God's ontological perfection. It means that he's possessed of intellect and will. And if you think this means he "coddles" human beings, I would recommend a thorough reading of the Bible!
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago
thank you for responding, father. your definition of "personhood" defies common use; perhaps a different term is needed. but even in different terms, the issue is the concept. you individualize god in a way that serves your ego and justifies your position. you even address god as "he", a singular, masculine pronoun while conceptually, god is neither. not being argumentative; i welcome your explanation.
gtoure 2 years ago
@gtoure How does it defy common use? A person is someone endowed with intellect, will, and freedom. What do you think a person is? And in point of fact, I'm not "individualizing" God if by that you mean that I'm turning God into a particular being. God is not one being among many; but rather the sheer act of to-be itself. Now the sheer act of to-be itself must be possessed of every ontological perfection, and that means he is a person.
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago
with all due respect sir, i recommend a thorough reading of the dictionary. the primary definitions for "person" are "human" and "individual", singular terms that individualize and humanize. as does the pronoun "he". also, one can have no discernible intellect, will or freedom and still be a "person". a human embryo, for example.
i can dig your explanation of god as an "act". since an "act" is essentially a change from inaction to action, i suppose you agree with the theory that god is change.
gtoure 2 years ago
@gtoure I'm operating out of Boethius's definition of person as "an instance of a rational nature." On this reading, humans are indeed persons, but they don't exhaust the category, for there are spiritual persons as well. When I speak of God as pure act, I don't imply any change in God. I mean that he is utterly actualized, perfect in being.
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago
also; you focused on my use of the word "coddles" and missed my point. you did not address the separation from nature nor the concept of god's omnipresence and universal equality.
gtoure 2 years ago
@gtoure I must confess that I'm not following you here.
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago
@gtoure:
Now I couldn't have said that any better! Well said!
witchwild 2 years ago
@witchwild To be a person is to be endowed with intellect, will, and freedom. It doesn't necessarily imply embodiment. God, who is a spirit, is not living in a "place;" so it would be difficult to "hang out" with him. I might recommend, however, prayer.
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago
The definition of 'Person' is a 'Human Being'.
'Person' also means a 'Corporate Body', as in, 'they found the papers on 'her person'. Even our 'personalities' are *physical* attributes. Our soul, on the other hand, is our inner being, our essense, our spirit. I would never pray to a 'person'.
witchwild 2 years ago
@witchwild But why in the world would you "pray" to an impersonal force? I mean, you might try to effect some sort of communion with it, but prayer?
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago
When I pray I connect to my Deity on a deeply emotional level, fully focussed & aware I'm bonding my with the Divine Spirit. She is me & I am Her. Spiritually, speaking. When I finish praying the Spiritual Light of the Goddess still surrounds me with Her Love but I am an individual 'Person', a carnal being, a mere novice working towards *becoming* a Being of Light, whereas She is Divinity & She IS the Light!
Ooop, Father! Forgot to mention I'm a Pagan Priestess! ;-)
witchwild 2 years ago
@witchwild Well, I gathered as much! What you're describing I would characterize as a mystical communion with nature. When I speak of prayer, I always mean a communion of persons, a contact between a human being and the God who knows us better than we know ourselves.
wordonfirevideo 2 years ago
Father, I don't think we'll ever agree on this subject. Yet to me, yor prayer & my prayer is not that different-just you connect with a male God whom u resonate with, & I pray to a Goddess whom I resonate with. Religion is a very personal thing. We all have our own little 'rules & rituals' that are good for each one of us individually. Guess we humans shud just respect each others religions & not try to 'change or judge' one another's beliefs. Very sorry for my rudeness earlier on in my posts.
witchwild 2 years ago