New "Watchmen" Trailer

I'm really looking forward to the Watchmen movie next May. It is based on the work of a genius, Alan Moore. He wrote a graphic novel of the same name quite a while ago, about the early 1980's. It turned the ideas of what a "superhero" is. I never read the book because at the time it was published I was child and it's most definitely not for children. I think I may read it now that I'm grown. I'm looking forward to the movie because the director is the same director as 300, Zack Snyder. He promised to be faithful to source material. He was spot on in how he translated Frank Miller's work from comic book to screen in 300 so I think he will be able to do the same with Watchmen. Here is the latest trailer.

New Star Trek Trailer

Ok, I realize that it may make me a geek, but I love Star Trek. The whole franchise. Each and every series....all the movies...well except for Star Trek V - it sucked. I'm part of that generation that knew the original series only through re-runs. All my peers had someone in their early lives who made them watch Star Trek whether they wanted to or not - leading to them either detesting the show or becoming life long fans such as I. In my case it was my eldest brother. He's 16 years older than I and he plopped me in front of the TV to watch Star Trek with him as soon as I was able to sit up by myself. By the time I was 5 years old I had seen every single episode and could even quote lines from many episodes. I'd like to one day post a blog article about Star Trek, how it has affected my World View, society, and it's theology, but for now I just wanted to post the trailer for the new movie coming out next year. It's based on the original with an all-new cast.

Heroes Online Comics

On one hand, NBC has supported the show Heroes extremely well...especially in providing fun interactive content for the Internet. You can get interactive web comics that have voice overs, sound effects, and great art. They expand the story and sometimes feature characters that are not in the TV series. You can even download the stories as standard comic books. They are really well done and are released once a week. You can find all of this material at the official site.

Matrix Parodies

I found these videos on YouTube and I think that they are Hilarious! What if the Matrix really did run on Windows. I think the makers of these videos hit it right.

Reincarnated Budah?

I saw the following article on AOL called Devotees Say Teen Is Buddha Reborn. People are saying that an 18 year-old boy is the reincarnation of Buddha. In a world, such as ours, where eastern mysticism is given the same weight in society as traditional religions in America. Many Americans, including some Christians, accept reincarnation. What I really wanna point out is that some of the teachings of Buddha conflict with the worldview God tells us to have. The important thing to remember that Buddhaism teaches you reach enlightenment by looking within you. Jesus said that enlightenment can only be found through him. They both cannot be right simultaneously. The Bible says that it is appointed once for us to die...and then the judgement. We don't come back over and over again





The one question, I have always had about reincarnation is how do you know you have enough Karma stored up to upgrade to the next form of existence? Who says one life form is a step forward and another is step back. It's the same problem with evolution. A lot animals who are considered "beneath" us have abilities that we don't have. If evolution is all about passing the best traits so that the next level life form has the best chance for survival then why can't we see in the dark as well as cats? Why can't we fly? Don't get me wrong I thank God for my oppoesable thumbs, but if evolution was true would not the highest evolved creatures contain the best traits of all the other animals in the descent tree? I know some would aregue that we are not directly descended from cats or birds. Fine. But how come all the other primates have greater physical strength and durability then we do? Would not the ultimate primate have the strength and staminia of a mountain gorrilla but have human "intellect"? No such being exists on earth. And I see no way such a one could evolve out of us.

Also, concerning reincarnation, if it were true, then the sum number of living things on the earth would never change. I mean if souls are only switching bodies then it would be a closed system. Why then would there be more humans living on earth simultaneously than at any previous time? By extension, I doubt that that the same cannot be said about other species of life, even if you allow for souls to be in any living thing even plants. Therefore reincarnation cannot stand.

Batman vs "Batman"

I just read on a blog, that there is a town in the nation of Turkey named Batman and they have filed suit against Warner Bros for using their name!? The only way this could fly is if that town has been around since before the year 1939, when Batman was first published. And if it was, then why sue now? I mean there have been thousands of comic books published, 6 major movies, and not to mention the dozens of animated series and video games and other merchandise and media that the character has appeared on and in. Why haven't they complained before now? I hope this gets thrown out. I wish this was joke.

I'd Call This"Terrorism"

This morning on James White's blog I heard about something that should receive national attention. On Sunday, November 9, 2008, some gay "activist" crashed a church meeting. Thirty people sat through a portion of the worship service and then in a pre-arranged and coordinated coup, disrupted the service. Dr White posted a link to an article reporting on the incident. This post includes a copy of a picture of the perpetrators. Here is an excerpt:

Prayer had just finished when men and women stood up in pockets across the congregation, on the main floor and in the balcony. "Jesus was gay," they shouted among other profanities and blasphemies as they rushed the stage. Some forced their way through rows of women and kids to try to hang a profane banner from the balcony while others began tossing fliers into the air. Two women made their way to the pulpit and began to kiss.

Their other props? I'll let them tell you in their own words... from another of their liberal blogs:

"(A) video camera, a megaphone, noise makers, condoms, glitter by the bucket load, confetti, pink fabric...yeh."

The video camera they put to good use as they attempted to provoke a violent reaction. The image of the pink-clad folks above is one of theirs, stating in a picture worth more than a thousand words the goals of the Michigan left.

I admit the article did seem to try to imply that the protesters were having sex publicly in the building or displaying used condoms, without really saying that they did it. Therefore I'd be willing to discount that part of the report. However, disrupting a church service...any church service...is a denial of rights as an American citizen. Apparently the protesters did not like the church's teachings concerning abortion and same-sex marriage. Two things stick out to me. One, This didn't happen in region of America known for liberal stunts. This was not San Francisco, Los Angeles, Berkeley, Las Vegas, Miami, or even New York. It took place in Lansing, Michigan!!!!! And, two, where do we draw the line between "protester" and "terrorist"? When you attack and disrupt a worship service, that's an act of terrorism. I mean do we burst into gay people's bed rooms and stop them in what they are doing? No. And we haven't the legal right, no matter how much we may disagree.

John McCain: Good Character

Although, I'm glad he lost the election,I've got to admit that John McCain has really surprised me as to how graciously he loses. While many Republicans are busy blaming Sarah Palin for the lost, McCain does not publicly condemn her and refuses to be a "sore loser". I think that is classy. Also he seems to genuinely respect Barack Obama now. At the beginning, I don't think he did. McCain recently has been on Jay Leno and talked about loosing the election. Here is a clip.

Mirror's Edge: A Game Like No Other

I have just heard about a video game that is like none other I have ever seen. It's called Mirror's Edge. It's different because it's a first person action game that plays as 3D platformer! What that means is that you are running and jumping, flipping and diving - like the Tomb Raider series or Mario or Legend of Zelda - but in the first person perspective. You can't see your character's face unless you are looking at a reflective surface. You see the world and all the action from her point of view. To get an idea of how this looks check out the video below.

MSNBC Anchor Emotionally Pleads Against Prop 8

Keith Olbermann gives his opinion on Proposition 8 and he was against it. Here is what he said.





I must admit that I am amazed by the arguments spewing from his mouth. His main points seem to be that what homosexuals do and whom they "love" is of no concern anyone but themselves. And that they must be seen as living just as valid lives as people who live traditional lives. He also seems to think that standing against gay people means that you hate gay people. He also said that the legal definition of marriage has changed over the years to first exclude slaves and interracial marriages and now that has changed to include us. The problem is that as a Christian, I'm not just trying to uphold a "legality" but the definition of "marriage" passed down to us from God. Since He invented it, don't you think we should use his definition. Giving black people and discriminated minorities equal rights under the law and legally recognizing their marriages did not change the definition of "marriage" but only restored it to what it has always been intended by God: union of one man and one woman.

By definition, a Christian believes that every human being is sinful and in need of Jesus for salvation from Hell and reconciliation with God. Biblically, homosexuality is no greater sin than lying, stealing, murder, adultery, or any other sin. Any of these mean you deserve to go to Hell. It is way more loving and not hate to point out to people when they sin against God so that they can choose to repent and submit themselves to God's standards, thereby accepting the gift of salvation.If I hated someone I would shield this knowledge from them so that they will be lost. But because Jesus has put love in my heart for everyone, including homosexuals, of course I can't let them go on about their business to redefine "marriage" without pointing out the error.

One thing I agree with Olbermann about is that us voting on same-sex marriage in California will indeed affect the rest of the country. If it makes it here it will be all over the nation eventually.

Doug Wilson vs Christopher Hitchens

I read about a great debate on the Alpha Omega Ministries blog. It's between Doug Wilson and Christopher Hitchens on October 30, 2008. The audio is below. I thought that Hitchens did not say anything new from what I have heard him say before. It's hard to talk to someone like Hitchens because he is the living embodiment of what the Bible says. He said that he rejects God because if there was a God that deity would be unassailable and unaccountable. He understands what is at stake. If there was a God he said that he sees no reason or right to question God's actions or purposes. I agree. Hitchens cannot accept being out of control and a supreme being being in control of him. He can't trust that being to do what is best for him and the universe because he does not like what he sees in the world. All else he argues is a rationalization to get around his own accountability to God. I disagree with Hitchens about what the Bible says. He said that he does not like to be told that he does not have divine information because it was not revealed to him. I think Dr. Wilson did a great job interacting with him.

Get this widget | Track details | eSnips Social DNA

Frank Turek vs Christopher Hitchens

On the Internet, I found this debate where Frank Turek debated Christopher Hitchens. It took place September 08, 2008. The topic was: Does God Exists? It took place at Virginia Commonwealth University. It's quite good. You can find a great place to download it from here.


Christopher Hitchens/Frank Turek Debate from Larry M on Vimeo.

Rival Monks Throwdown

Okay, I see more and more why the old folks used to say that the "world is going to hell in a handbasket." I just saw a news report of monks fighting in the church where many people believe was the site of Jesus' tomb. I saw the article on AOL News. They were fighting in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. The fight was between Armenian and Greek orthodox monks over a piece of Jesus' cross in the 4th century AD. I'm amazed. Apparently the Israeli police break up fights among Christian sects in Jerusalem often. And the truth is this one fight is over nothing. First it's debatable where exactly the crucifiction and resurrection took place. The churches built on tradtional locations were set in place 300 years after the events really took place. And some of the best archeology and information we have says that there are other locations that fit what the Bible says. I think its on purpose that we don't know the exact locations to the nearest inch because relics and commemorating locations is not what God wants us to focus on. Jesus told us to go and make disciples of the world, not fight over relics and who has the right to what piece of land. I'm surprised the Muslims weren't in on this fight. But then why would they care about Jesus' tomb or a piece of the cross? Yeah...answered my own question

Suing Christians

The reason why people are concerned that ministers can be sued for not supporting gay marriage is because such things have happened before. You have stated that the Mormon allowed Blacks and outlawed polygamy. These are examples of faith and practice being changed due to government interference. The federal government said to the Mormons that we will jail you if you continue polygamy because you are breaking the laws of the United States. I've studied some history of the Mormon church by looking at apologetic debates and this is a hot topic as to how valid some of the claims of the Mormons (which I will not get into here). For more see the work of Dr.Walter Martin who was excellent at witnessing and talking to Mormons with gentleness and respect. The point is that Mormons did not get rid of polygamy on their own. The top leader at the time "heard" from God and due to that "revelation" they got rid of polygamy after the government made an issue of it. Please research this if you don't believe me.

On top of that black people were barred from the Mormons because they were not considered human or worthy of salvation since the days of their Founder, Joseph Smith. They only started to allow Black people because of the weight of the civil rights movement in the 1960's.

I do not think that its good idea to assume that gay people will not be able to sue churches to make them accept homosexuality because it's already happening in the United Kingdom. I saw a story in the past few month. Look at this link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-417582/Vicars-sued-refusing-bless-gay-weddings-fears-Church.html

In addition, just recently, Bible Publisher Zondervan is being sued for their translation of the Bible because it hurts the feelings of the homosexual platiff named Bradley Fowler. His complaint is with 1 Corinthians 6:9 and how it lists homosexuality in a list of sins. See http://endtimespropheticwords.wordpress.com/2008/07/10/zondervan-faces-60m-federal-lawsuit-over-bible-homosexuality/

Fowler said that it's a mistranslation. Here is a list of several translations and how that verse is rendered: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%206:9;&version=31;9;49;50;

Each translation says the same thing but not in the same English words. In the Greek the offending word is "aresenokotes" (Strong's number: 733) and the lexicon I own is "one engaging in homosexual acts, sexual deviant". As far as I know when the 1st Century readers read "aresenokotes" the understood Paul was writing about Homosexuals....what they do as being offensive not who they are or something that God cannot deliver them from. Here is the whole passage,verses 9 and 10 (NIV):

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

Star Wars: Clone Wars Comic

Here is the link: http://www.starwars.com/clonewars/comic/index.html

Proposition 8 Passed in California

As you probably know Proposition 8, banning gay marriage, squeaked by in California. I voted for it because I see no reason for re-defining marriage. I thought that homosexuals had almost the same rights as heterosexual married couples, so there was no reason to change what "marriage" means. I found out that I was wrong. In California, homosexual couples in "domestic partnerships" have the same rights as traditional married couples. Look at Domestic Partnerships in California. Here is some information from that article:

A California domestic partnership is a legal relationship available to same-sex couples, and to certain opposite-sex couples in which at least one party is at least 62 years of age. It affords the couple virtually all of the same substantive legal benefits and privileges, and imposes upon the couple all of the same legal obligations and duties, that California law affords to and imposes upon a married couple.

As of 2007, California affords domestic partnerships all of the same rights and responsibilities as marriages under state law (Cal. Fam. Code §297.5). Among these:

• Making health care decisions for each other in certain circumstances
• Hospital and jail visitation rights that were previously reserved for family members related by blood, adoption or marriage to the sick, injured or incarcerated person.
• Access to family health insurance plans (Cal. Ins. Code §10121.7)
• Spousal insurance policies (auto, life, homeowners etc..), this applies to all forms of insurance through the California Insurance Equality Act (Cal. Ins. Code §381.5)
• Sick care and similar family leave
• Stepparent adoption procedures
• Presumption that both members of the partnership are the parents of a child born into the partnership
• Suing for wrongful death of a domestic partner
• Rights involving wills, intestate succession, conservatorships and trusts
• The same property tax provisions otherwise available only to married couples (Cal. R&T Code §62p)
• Access to some survivor pension benefits
• Supervision of the Superior Court of California over dissolution and nullity proceedings
• The obligation to file state tax returns as a married couple (260k) commencing with the 2007 tax year (Cal R&T Code §18521d)
• The right for either partner to take the other partner's surname after registration
• Community property rights and responsibilities previously only available to married spouses
• The right to request partner support (alimony) upon dissolution of the partnership (divorce)
• The same parental rights and responsibilities granted to and imposed upon spouses in a marriage

Eligibility

Currently, a couple that wishes to register must meet the following requirements:

1. Both persons have a common residence.
2. Neither person is married to someone else or is a member of another domestic partnership with someone else that has not been terminated, dissolved, or adjudged a nullity.
3. The two persons are not related by blood in a way that would prevent them from being married to each other in California.
4. Both persons are at least 18 years of age.
5. Either of the following:
   • Both persons are members of the same sex.
   • The partners are of the opposite sex, one or both of whom is above the age of 62, and one or both of whom meet specified eligibility requirements under the Social Security Act.
6. Both persons are capable of consenting to the domestic partnership.

Update: Robert Downey Jr's Comments on ReCast

I saw an article today at ReelComix.com that contained what Robert Downey, Jr thinks about the casting fiasco on Iron Man 2. As I have blogged earlier, Terrence Howard has been replaced by Don Cheadle to play James Rhodes/War Machine in Iron Man 2 and Avengers. Robert Downey Jr. plays Tony Stark/Iron Man. Here is what Robert Downey Jr said about the casting problem:

“It’s one of those situations where I still don’t quite know what
happened or why. Here’s what happens too: things happen and you wind up
commenting on them before you’ve actually talked to the people and it’s
in poor taste.”

I was glad to see him take the high road...not burning any bridges. Smart! You never know you will have to work with...or for....again. However, it does not answer any questions. I mean was Terrence Howard screwed or not? The story still isn't clear, but to summarize how I understand it from the article I have read:

The Studio is saying that Howard was paid more than anyone else on the first Iron Man because he signed on first (No idea how). They say that he was horrible to work with. They say that they weren't happy with his performance and had to cut and re-shoot a lot. They paired down his role in Iron Man 2 and offered him 50-80% less than what he earned in the first film and Howard said no. So they offered the role to Don Cheadle in Iron Man 2 and Avengers.

The problem is that no interview I have read can confirm that Howard did badly or that the Rhodes role was ever paired down. He got glowing reviews from nearly everyone connected to making Iron Man. Still sounds fishy. Howard himself said that he read about his firing in the trades like everyone else. I've not heard Jon Favreau weigh in on this at all. I know he is prepping the next movie so he is busy but I wanna know what happened because I was looking forward to seeing War Machine on the screen and I think Terrence can pull it off. The reason why the first movie worked was because Robert Downey Jr made Tony Stark believable as a genius who plays be his own rules and a man crazy enough to strap himself into a suit like that, fly around, and force people to not misuse his creations. In order for War Machine to work, you have to believe that James Rhodes is the kind of man who is so loyal and dedicated to protecting others that he is willing to risk putting that thing on. I believe Terrence Howard would....I'm not sure if Don Cheadle can sell it.

Obama Through the Lens of Superman

I found a couple of video on YouTube that Celebrate Obama's historic election as President and mixes in scenes from the very first 2 Superman movies and 2006's Superman Returns.

SuperBarack


"Obama Returns" DNC '08 Nomination Trailer (Superman Remix)

Canonicity Part 3: The Book of Enoch

In 2001 and 2002 I explored the notion that there were books missing from the Bible by way of studying Genesis 6:4 which says:

The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.

I was intrigued by who the "Nephilim" were/are. The King James Version translates the word as "Giants". In Hebrew "Nephilim" mean "fallen one" or "to fall". The Bible connects the Nephilim to men who are described as nearly monstrously tall and large, also called . Men like Goliath (1 Samuel 17:4) - whom David slew, the man described in 2 Samuel 21:20 and 1 Chronicles 20:6, men who were sometimes referred to as Anakites (Numbers 13:33, Joshua 11:22; Deuteronomy 1:28), Og king of Bashan (who was an Rephaites - Deuteronomy 3:11), and others. Using this information, 2 separate explanations as to who the Nephilim are have been proposed...both are Orthodox...and they hinge on the identities of the "son of God".

Some people use Job 1:6 which in the KJV refers to angels as "sons of God". this would mean that angels fathered children by human women. Then it doesn't take much imagination that children of angels would be bigger and stronger then pure humans. This idea is bolstered by the Book of Enoch which emphatically states that this is what happened. However, not everyone agrees that this is the correct understanding of who the Nephilim are because of two reasons. First, "sons of God" elsewhere in the Old Testament refers to human beings and second, because Jesus said angels do no marry (Matthew 22:30; Mark 12:25) and therefore we conclude that angels cannot have sex or procreate.

I am not leaning toward the interpretation that "sons of God in Genesis 6 is not referring to angles because it cannot be corroborated with the rest of the 65 books that I know are scripture. However when I was flirting with the idea that the Book of Enoch was truly inspired, I researched how we go the copy we have today and looked at if the 1st Century church used the Book of Enoch as scripture. What I found out was that the oldest copies we have are more than 2000 years old, dating back to the time of the Dead Sea Scrolls. We don't have any Hebrew copies nor do we know what original language it was written in. The copy I have is translated from a Coptic copy. If it was really written by the real Enoch, it would have to be extremely old. Enoch was first mentioned in Genesis 5:19 - seven generations from Adam. This make me doubt that he wrote it. However the rub is that the Book of Enoch is quoted in Jude 1:14,15 which we know the book of Jude is divinely inspired. The passage says:

Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

The question I was asking was: If a book is quoted in scripture, does that mean the book is also scripture? Going back to the first canonicity post I wrote, I have to apply the criteria scripture gives. Under that criteria I have to conclude that no the Book of Enoch is not scripture. Don't believe me? Read it yourself:

Get your own - Open publication

Okay, I know what you're asking. The same question I asked upon reaching this conclusion: Does this mean that Jude is not inspired either? Jude is inspired according to the criteria scripture sets up. Obviously, first century Jews and Christians had access to the Book of Enoch but we know it was not part of the Jewish canon. I think that the fact that Jude quotes the Book of Enoch because it was a common piece of literature his readers were familiar with and illustrated the points he was inspired by the Holy Spirit to make. Here is an illustration: if a preacher quotes a movie or a book...does that make the movie or book scripture, even if the point being made is true? No. I often wonder if there be a confusion 2000 years from now about what Christians today consider scripture with all the different texts and denominations floating around today. I wonder because some of us are more familiar with the Left Behind books than we are with scripture.

“IN TEARS" OBAMA OFFICE TELEPHONE BANK CALLERS

Check this Out. Mrs. Scelestine Langston is a mother in the Church of God in Christ. Her first son, Bishop James L. Langston, Jr is a bishop in the church of God in Christ.

Contact: Dr. Louis C. Langston
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Cell Phone: (510) 582-3461
Email: "Sandra Langston"

“IN TEARS" OBAMA OFFICE TELEPHONE BANK CALLERS
"Volunteer Caller, 100 years of age Matriarch"




Photo L to R.- Ms. Diskowski, Bishop James Langston, Mrs. Sandra Langston, Armand Burns, Dr. Louis Langston, Mrs. LaJuanah Lunceford, Mrs. Scelestine on Telephone
==============<><><>==============
Berkeley, California, October 28, 2008 – Obama Headquarters Office welcomed the unexpected 100 year old, Mrs. Scelestine Langston. She was accompanied by her forth generation son, a first time voter, Armand Burns; her first son, Bishop James L. Langston, Jr.; her seventh son and his wife, Dr. Louis C. and Sandra M. Langston; and her second daughter, LaJuanah R. Langston-Lunceford. The staff and volunteers in the crowded office were aggressive in calling and working the telephone banks to Get-Out-The-Vote.

Ms. Dawn Diskowski, Phone Bank Captain, and Bishop Langston, assisted Mrs. Scelestine Langston in making her first call to Jonathan Christman of Norwalk, Ohio. Christman was very surprised to receive an out-of-state, get-out-the-vote call from the 100 year old great-great grandmother but happily promised her he would go out and vote for Obama.

Mrs. Langston’s fourth generation son, Armand Burns, said he was encouraged to register to vote after listening to his great-grandmother. She told him and the others listening that her life has come full circle and is now complete. Her faith in God is unyielding; her family is intact; and with the real possibility of Obama’s becoming the nations forty-fourth president, her belief in change makes more sense now than it ever has. To use Obama's words, she is now embued with hope.

The 100-year old matriarch, Mrs. Langston, the oldest of three children, was born to Louis and Orelia Jenkins on March 8, 1908 in Jeanerette, Louisiana. She gave birth to 11 children.