Monday, January 25, 2010

YouTube - T.V. Rants: Black Panther Animated Series


I found this video on YouTube and while I commend the author for his "enlightened" view about televised violence - especially - at 17 years of age, I must respectfully disagree. To be fair, the young man is not real familiar with the Black Panther character and based his whole opinion on this trailer that has been rolling round the internet since 2008. He also told me that he has not read the 6 issues of the comic book on which the animated series is based. All that being said I'd like to comment on the animated series now that I have seen 2 episodes in their entirety.


Both the books and the show make it clear that Wakanda (Black Panther's nation) was
Wakanda (comics)Image via Wikipedia
under attack by a hostile tribe. What happened was violent yest, but needed. The Wakandans handled the situation with finality and left one alive so he could spread the word: Leave Wakanda alone. The story contains must political intrigue
and social commentary - that isn't politically correct but historically correct for a work of fiction. The Black Panther is the fist black superhero in all of fiction to be solo and not not connected to an established white character. He is iconic. The animated series' choice to adapt Hudlin' first 6 issues was genius because it's a great jumping on point for anyone who knows nothing about the character and establishes that Storm (yes, of the X-Men) will eventually marry him.


Now about the violence. The young man remarked that in the X-Men cartoons, Wolverine does not kill, however anyone who knows Wolverine from the comic books know that he crosses the line repeatedly. In the cartoon, it was for children and back then you could not show blood in children's programs. Same thing is true for the Batman and Superman series. Batman does not kill either but he toes that line. Remember when he threatened to drawn a suspect in the Gotham Bay while he dangled him by one hand from the Batwing? That was from the animated series' first season. Superman gives it a much wider breadth. The reason why those series worked was that they stayed with source material. The producers for Black Panther are doing the same.

What about the morality of the Panther's actions? I'll table the discussion of Superman, Batman, and Wolverine for later. I don't see a problem with the Panther's actions in the Who is the Black Panther story arc because the Panther is never shown killing anyone. Even in trying to avenge his Father, it's not about murder. Remember killing and murder are not the same thing. The men in the clip below came to steal, kill, and destroy Wakanda. There is nothing in the Bible against self defense. If someone starts a war with you, it's perfectly moral to end it. sometimes that mean ending them. I want to end with a quote from Ecclesiastes 3:1-8

1 There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven:

2 a time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,

3 a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,

4 a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,

5 a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain,

6 a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,

7 a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,

8 a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.

Here is what the young man posted:



What do you think?

YouTube - T.V. Rants: Black Panther Animated Series
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Iron Sharpens Iron: Dr. Anthony Bradley: "Liberating Black Theology: The Bible & the Black Experience in America


As you may know, i enjoy listening to the Iron Sharpens Iron ministry. Last week they had a guest that I think all black people need to hear. It's awesome. Dr. Anthony Bradley was interviews on his new book the refutes Black Liberation Theology. The book is titled "Liberating Black Theology: The Bible & the Black Experience in America". He councils that we have to take our attention of ourselves and how racism has affected our lives and stop blaming white people for everything and instead focus on God. I agree. Take a listen. 

Iron Sharpens Iron: Dr. Anthony Bradley: "Liberating Black Theology: The Bible & the Black Experience in America
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: The Messianic Expectation of the Old Testament


I always wondered how a modern scholar would summarize how Jews in the Old Testament viewed their expectation of the messiah., Looks like i don't have to wonder anymore. I highly suggest reading the link below.

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: The Messianic Expectation of the Old Testament
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

THE APOLOGETIC FRONT: A challenge to futurists on Matthew 24


There is an awesome challenge put forth by Mike on his blog, The Apologetic Front. I, like him have always thought of Matthew 24 as talking about future events (our day?)  but is now backing off somewhat from that assumption. I still don't think that all of Revelations or Matthew 24 or Daniel can be explained from the point of view as being fulfilled in the past, but I think that a great deal can be shown to have been fulfilled. Mike proposes that the people who believe that Matthew 24 has future fulfillment.write their arguments in his comment section. He is asking for arguments from Matthew 24  that are categorically to be fulfilled in the future. I like that idea! I have the same question.

I would say that Matthew 24  & 25 must be interpreted remembering that Jesus is responding to a question. Look at verses 1 - 3 of Matthew 24.

Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."
As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"

The disciples asked Jesus two separate questions: When will the temple be destroyed?  When will the end of the world happen? I believe that Jesus answered the first question  in verses 4 - 25 about the Temple's destruction. I take verse 15 as proof of that. Starting at verse 14:

And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
"So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again.If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible. See, I have told you ahead of time.


I think Jesus did a good  job in describing the events of 70 AD - about 40 years prior to what happened. The Emperor Caligula had tried to set up idols in the holy pace in the Temple. The interesting thing to me is that Jesus said that when you see the abomination that causes desolation standing in the holy place he seems to be describing a person not an idol and as far I can tell Caligula's order was never presented. This is why I've never thought that Jesus was merely describing AD 70. I would argue that it was in this paassge Jesus is sifting from talking about the temple to the end of the world. I'd say vs 26 to the end pf the chapter are definitely future. Look at verses 30 and 31 for example:

"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

This has not happened yet. It can only happen once and it has not happened ever in any history we can point to.

I found some great links on the Internet concerning the Fall of the Temple and 70 AD.
Eyewitness to History.com - The Romans Destroy the Temple at Jerusalem, 70 AD
The Destruction of Herod's Temple in 70 A.D. As Foreseen by the Prophet Ezekiel
Destruction of Jerusalem fulfilled Matthew 24 in 70 AD - Siege Map
The Destruction of the Second Temple

Most important fun fact about the Temple's destruction that I did not know was that the fall of the Temple was the same date (month and day) as the Babylonian destruction of Solomon's temple!

THE APOLOGETIC FRONT: A challenge to futurists on Matthew 24
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

The 12 Most Powerful Christians in Hollywood - The 12 Most Powerful Christians in Hollywood - Beliefnet.com


Here is a great article listing the 12 most powerful Christians in Hollywood. It's really cool. I'm planning to go more in-depth into what they believe in the coming months.

The 12 Most Powerful Christians in Hollywood - The 12 Most Powerful Christians in Hollywood - Beliefnet.com