Should a Christian see the movie "AVATAR"?

by skeeter1 51 Replies latest jw friends

  • Lady Viola
    Lady Viola

    Looooooooooved the movie and saw it two times in 3D.

  • truthlover

    Saw Avatar, Stargate - SG1 and Atlantis series, Star Wars, Star Trek - series and movies, just ordered the last season of Stargate Atlantis on DVD and looking forward to their theatre release sometime in 2010...

    Loved Avatar and did get the same message -- from a spanish elder --- and who is he? will he be in the truth in 2 years?? Tying the Navi and the story line in with demonism and false worship is over the top.. wonder if he saw the movie?

  • OnTheWayOut

    My mother got the email from concerned JW's that "Avatar" is a Hindu descendant of a deity. She thought it was totally stupid and overly touchy of JW's to worry about such stuff. At least there's cracks in my mother's armor.

  • zagor

    For me that movie was more of a political statement about U.S involvement in Iraq etc, projected on a cosmic scale. As for christians, they can get offended if they see themselves as far superiour to all those who are "not saved", because of their "different ways"...

    And btw, my best friend is a Hindu. I've asked him about it and interestingly he finds Avatar's comparison to Hindu dieties about as similar to each other as rum balls are to those "his wife juggles every evening" (his words)....

    Like always some people just don't see the line where Disney world ends and real begins.

  • Ilive

    I recently had this article sent to me by a friend

    Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 9:31 PM Subject: A well-written article (by a brother) who lives in Arkansas and is an elder in a Spanish congregation there. Dear friends:
    How can you have escaped the advertising promoting a new movie--that has made more money than any movie ever made. That is the publicity I have seen in the news this past week. I could only wonder about the name of it for it was a word I had never used, or that I could remember

    The article continues. I find it quite disturbing that this article is going around lately.

    First of where do we receive our spiritual food? What channel is being used to deliver information we need in a timely manner for Jehovah's people? He utilizes the faithful and discreet slave class through articles in the magazines, publications and letters read at the congregation. Not through articles who we do not truly know the source.

    For someone to write an article, set a precedent to follow and then send it out is very, very dangerous. We do have articles about not doing that from the proper channel. We do not utilize other methods than what Jehovah has provided to relay information like this. We do not know if the source is indeed an apostate or other. We have been warned about sending articles like these around. This person may well be correct in his views on the matter but at the same time it is not up to him to descide and set the rules on this.

    Recently at the assembly we talked about the Fellars who were right about a few teachings but instead of waiting or going through the proper channels promoted their own teachings and ended up seperating from the truth. I know this brother was not promoting his own teachings but it starts out like this and we truly do not know the source. He could very well be an apostate in sheeps clothing.

    Resending the article that did not come through official channels could be supporting someone we do not know, which is part of the dangers of the internet.

    We should not doubt others love of Jehovah or view them any differantly on what Jehovah has set as a personal choice based on his principals. We do not make a rule out of something Jehovah himself has marked a personal descision. There are articles that support this very aspect.

    Setting standards and precedents for others is not a good thing. If it was okay to set these precedents the Branch would come out with a list of dos and don't. A list of movies to see or not see, or simply create a blanket rule. So specifically calling out one movie and saying Christians should not watch it is setting a precedent which if not coming through Jehovah's channels is not acceptable.

    Some have said "if worldy people think it is bad" Problem is we cannot gage the world's view in most instances. There are "Christian" denominations who teach alcohol, sexual pleasure in marriage, dancing, contraception and things like this as wrong. Remember everything in Satan's system is unbalanced. So yes you do have conservative Christian groups going off on that movie. Their opinion truly does not count.

    I have seen a real danger with these posts and strong opinions about the movie. I have even seen brothers and sisters doubt others love for Jehovah. So a fair warning do not go past the things written, do not support sending messages that are opinion based and setting precedents for our brothers and sisters. WE cannot make rules out of things Jehovah himself has dubbed a personal choice.

    AVATAR does have a hindu background in the way of the name which has been modified in our own language. That happens alot with many of our everday words. I would assume if the name Avatar was not used then we would not be having this discussion.

    AVATAR is derived from that early Hindu understanding. We use it in our modern English when it comes to electronic representations of ourselves while online or in a game.

    Other examples of words we commonly use with religous undertones. Monday-Sunday. Wednesday = Odin's day; Thursday - Thor's day; etc. So now we ban all movies with the words Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday.

    The movie itself is not about a godlike individual or spirit who came down into a body. It is about a human being who becomes an alien using modern technology. The planet itself is a giant computer. That information I found on the internet along with the information about the Hindu backdrop. So if it's on the internet it is true.

    Also if you ban the movie for it's "pagan" Na'vi people, then you must ban things like "Sound of Music" which shows Nuns and crosses. Any movie depicting Indians would be on the no list since they usually do some sort of chanting.

    If anything this movie is violent and shows people with bad imitative behavior. It also has some sensuality.

    The point is if you are going to set a "ban" on something make it clear and concise and not based on things that could be looking to into it. It's a violent movie, violence is bad, plain and simple. But trying to look deeper into the movie than what is really there, makes us look like extremists. The movie is violent, that's all a Christian needs to know to descide to stay away.

    Setting precedents for our brothers and sisters and spreading our opinions is not good and there are articles for that. We cannot dictate something that Jehovah has left up to our choice.

  • leavingwt

    A must-see rant against the film, by the pastor of Mars Hill Church, Mark Driscoll.

    "We love the arts, we just don't like Satan."

  • ziddina

    Ha, Ha!!! Skeeter, LOVE this thread!!! Great comments by everyone; enjoyed the "demonseedz" comments by JWs about the movie - and the above video - "The visuals are amazing!!" [He's seen the movie...] "Many of my friends are film directors!" [Especially Mel Gibson and his anti-Semitic "Passion of Christ"...]

    Hilarious!!! Zid

  • techdotcom
    Setting precedents for our brothers and sisters and spreading our opinions is not good and there are articles for that. We cannot dictate something that Jehovah has left up to our choice.

    You might want to tell the brother who gave the talk at the end of our circuit assembly. He read all the definitions that had to do with spirits inhabating 'Avatars' and then mentioned how there were other definitions too...

    Then he goes on to compare the definition of the word with how angels came down to earth before the flood. "And how the demons must be rejoicing" with the movies success at the box office.

    He admits there are other uses of the word and apparently did not even read a synopsis to see which definition applied to the movie. He never mentioned the other aspects that could have caused some to be bothered if they wanted to be picky. Violence, sex, semi-spiritual content with the planet itself being the Navi's god. Nope, he used the single WRONG application to imply that the movie somehow could be a symbolic depiction of preflood earth and the angels coming down.

    You know what several people said when I mentioned this.... "They research this stuff, he can't just say whatever he wants up there...." Sometimes I want to laugh and cry at the same time.

    The other sad thing is that even those who know he was off base about the movie will most likely just chalk it up to "imperfection" and still trust any other thing that come out of someones mouth on stage no matter how wrong without even bothering to check on something that might have set off a warning bell in their head.

  • Lady Lee
    Lady Lee

    Should JWs see Avatar?

    How else will they get to know what people on another planet look like and where they live so they can find them to sell them WT literature?

  • Mad Sweeney
    Mad Sweeney

    ET in the February 8th 1983 Awake, page 27

    Just for accuracy's sake it's the July 8, 1983 Awake, page 27. They devoted an entire article to E.T. LOL, stupid Borg!

Share this