Tuesday, July 31, 2012

To Whom It May Concern:

I just wanted to let NBC know that the policy to only allow live feed and replay access to people who have cable providers is not only irritating, but illogical. If I had cable, why would I need to watch online? I have Comcast internet, but do not own a TV. Because I do not have a cable package for the nonexistent TV, I have no way of watching the Olympics in the comfort of my own home. Does this make me want to go buy a TV and get cable? No. Not for the once every 2 years I'd need it.

I was able to watch the ENTIRE Royal Wedding last April online via the BBC. They weren't the only ones providing the privilege either. Since NBC has the exclusive rights to showing the Olympics in the US, I would think you would want to reach a broader audience. Allowing paying internet customers a way to watch online would be a much more 21st century approach.

Sincerely,
Kristin Barb
Irate Comcast Customer




Posted this here until NBC actually allows Feedback on the Olympic website.


Thursday, July 26, 2012

The Hobbit Part 3?

So apparently there's a rumour going around that Peter Jackson is delving into the Appendices for additional material...and possibly a third film to make The Hobbit duology into a trilogy. There's a good synopsis of this at www.theonering.net.

Personally, I think 2 Hobbit movies is plenty--An Unexpected Adventure and There & Back Again. HOWEVER, I will gladly find an overnight babysitter for my then-4 and 2 year olds in December 2014 if PJ does what I've been wanting him to do for YEARS...the BRIDGE MOVIE.

We--The Fans--are very aware that Jackson's movie rights only go so far. He does not have the rights to The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, etc, just LOTR and The Hobbit. So there are chunks of the Appendix that are "untouchable"...So there will be no Numenor, no Beleriand, no Seige of Angbad, no Beren & Luthien or Children of Hurin. I am patient.

We don't need to know who all the kings of Arnor and Gondor were either. Not immediately relevant to either story.

So we have to look at the Timeline Tolkien so thoughtfully provided to see what IS possible for a 3rd Hobbit or Bridge Movie.

What is or might already be in The Hobbit (from the Appendices, and either known from trailer or probably in flashback intro):
2770 III Smaug the Dragon descends on Erebor. Dale destroyed. Thror escapes with Thrain II and Thorin II.
2790 Thror slain by an Orc in Moria. Start of the War of the Dwarves and Orcs.
2845 Thrain is imprisoned in Dol Guldur.
2850 Gandalf enters Dol Guldur, finds Thrain, gets key to Erebor.
2851 White Council meets. Saruman begins search for The Ring.

Interestingly enough, all this happens before Bilbo is even born (2890). To further shock and awe, Gilraen THE MOTHER OF ARAGORN isn't born until 2907!

Jumping ahead for a second to follow the Timeline in order, this is what *I* think should be part of the Bridge Movie:
2933 Arathorn II slain, Gilraen takes Aragorn to Imladris. His ancestry is concealed and he is given the name Estel.

Now back to The Hobbit, which officially starts in 2941 with Thorin and Gandalf visiting Bilbo...The entirety of Bilbo's story takes 1 year, wrapping up in 2942.

Now back to what MIGHT be in a 3rd movie...

2944 Gollum goes in search of the ring thief!
2951 Elrond reveals Aragorn's true name and legacy. Insert the Tale of Aragorn and Arwen here.

2953 Last meeting of the White Council. Saruman lies about where he thinks the Ring is and starts fortifying Isengard.

2956 Aragorn and Gandalf meet.

2957-80 Aragorn's adventures in Rohan & Gondor under the alias Thorongil. (This is referenced in The Two Towers Extended Edition).

2980 Aragorn & Arwen plight their troth in Lothlorien.

Gollum meets Shelob

2989 Balin leaves Erebor and enters Moria.

2994: The dwarves awaken the Balrog.

3001: The Fellowship of the Ring storyline begins.


So in sum, I think there's enough content for a third film BUT it really doesn't fit under The Hobbit franchise title, even if you called it "The Hobbit: The White Council". Logically, the most content for a film would come from keeping the Ring a focus by including The Hunt for Gollum (Aragorn, Legolas, Gandalf, Rangers, Elves, oh my!)and The Tale of Aragorn & Arwen/Aragorn's undercover adventures. So Aragorn, not a hobbit, would be the main character. PJ would need to retain the White Council members, some of the dwarves, the Mirkwood/Rivendell elves, and Andy Serkis. He'd need to GET Liv Tyler, Viggo M, and some of his Lorien elves. He'd need to CAST Aragorn's parents, and the Gondor and Rohan parts.

So maybe I'll be getting a babysitter for a 5 and 3 year old???



Monday, July 9, 2012

The Jedi Way

This post is a slight deviation from my usual themes. I usually don't write a lot about interpretation of Scripture and I've NEVER written about anything Star Wars related. But I recently had two conversations with my brother-in-law, Josh, that showed a very interesting--and completely unintentional by the SW authors, I'm sure--parallel between living in God's grace and a Jedi's relationship with The Force.

Before I share parts of the conversation, I want to make my Disclaimer very clear:
* Jeremy, Josh, and I do not under any circumstances view the "Force" in the Star Wars universe as being in any way God-like. While the characters at times have experiences with it that remind us of Spiritual truths (like in this case), or it acts in ways that look like promptings of the Holy Spirit (ex: Jedi have the ability to react to things a few seconds before they happen and SW chars are famous for the line "I have a bad feeling about this."), we (like Tolkien) dislike allegory in most if not all forms and do not read fiction looking for ways to make it look or sound more "holy" (if that makes sense). As with every post, I love hearing feedback and welcome discussion. :)

Story background:

The Star Wars book "I, Jedi" tells the story of Corran Horn, a member of the new Jedi Order started and led by Luke Skywalker. He is finishing his training while also searching for his wife who has been kidnapped.

Luke has the difficult position as being the "Last Jedi" since most of them were wiped out by his father, Darth Vader, around the same time Luke was born (known as the Great Jedi Purge). Since most of the information about the Jedi--how they trained and details about their purpose--were lost with them and the destruction of their Temple and training facilities, Luke has had to essentially "start from scratch" by looking all over the known universe for people with "Force ability" and train them the way he was trained by his mentors Ben Kenobi (Obi Wan) and Yoda...both of whom died before they could tell him much about how to train others. Because of this, he's had to rely primarily on his own experience and the experiences of his first students to determine how the New Order will operate.

Three new Jedi stand out as the ones who tend to most often disagree with Luke and help him look at things from a different perspective: Corran, Kyp Durron, and Kyle Katarn. This particular book is about Corran, though Kyp plays a major role as well serving as a "foil" (drama term meaning opposite/opposing) to Corran.

Finally, a quick description of the terms "light side" and "dark side" that I will be using a lot. According to the viewpoint prevalent in this book, the Force has 2 sides. The "light" side is what the Jedi draw from, using it's power to help them help others. They essentially have "superpowers" which the Force provides the ability for them to do--things like run really really fast, leap tall buildings, split second reflexes, reading minds and influencing thoughts, minor healing abilities, making objects move, and making wise decisions based on "reading people". The "light side" cannot be used to harm others and decisions are encouraged when one "is at peace". The "dark side" of the Force is seen as the selfish, corrupt side. Mainly used by the Sith--the foil of the Jedi, example: Darth Vader--powers associated with it include choking even from great distances, lightning coming from your fingertips, killing for personal gain, windstorms caused by great anger, and so forth. It's fueled by passion, anger, & hate.

The Debate:
The main question Luke is struggling with, and that Corran helps him deal with in this book, is DOES A JEDI HAVE TO EXPERIENCE THE DARK SIDE IN ORDER TO BECOME BETTER/MORE SECURE IN THE FORCE? The related question, and purpose of this blog post, is the spiritual question, DOES A CHRISTIAN HAVE TO SIN IN ORDER TO EXPERIENCE GOD'S GRACE?


So here's where my blog actually begins. ;)

Jeremiah 17:9 is quoted often by Christians who believe that we are "sinners saved by grace". It says: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked, who can know it?" In Romans 11:32 Paul writes, "For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."

The verse in Romans actually started conversation #2 after church this morning, so I'll start there and work backwards. :)

I don't know about you, but there have been many times where I have heard people talk about how God has used past (now forgiven) sins to either grow them closer to God or give them insight into how to help another struggling person, Christian or not. It's quite true. God can use anything and everything to His glory. A verse often quoted to this purpose is Romans 8:28 "We know that all things work together for good for those who love God..." And 1 John 1:9 says "If we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness."

But to whom are these verses referring, Christians or those who do not yet know Him?

Now on the Jedi side of the discussion, Luke has seen what the dark side can do. His father used to be a talented and powerful Jedi Knight, Anakin Skywalker. He "fell to the dark side" due to a combination of his lust for power and his belief that he was not strong enough to do what he felt needed to be done...in his case saving the lives of his mother and wife. His fear of failure left him vulnerable to the whispered promises of Chancellor Palpatine who was a Sith in disguise. He offered Anakin unlimited power, but it resulted in his losing everything except that power. His wife died of a broken heart seeing the man he was becoming, he never got to know his 2 children and was their enemy the remainder of his life, and his body was permanently damaged and he spent the rest of his days part man-mostly machine. Luke himself has had to deal many times with his own anger and feelings of betrayal and he's seen several of his students fight similar battles, coming out scarred but generally stronger.

Luke also knows there is redemption. Darth Vader destroys the evil Emperor Palpatine, though the fight costs him his life. He spends his last minutes with Luke and is pictured later on standing with Yoda and Obi Wan, making it clear to the audience that he chose to come back to the light as he died.

Corran and Kyp both come into contact with the same Sith Lord, but each handles the experience differently. Kyp tries to use dark side power for what he sees as a greater good--similar to Vader's response to it--but ends up killing millions of people. Corran tries to find ways to destroy the Sith and, while tempted by the powers offered and the promise that they "will" help him save his wife, sticks to his resolve, though he is physically and mentally tortured.

I wish I had a copy of the book with me so I could find exact quotes. At the moment all I know for sure is what Josh told me and I hope I'm interpreting it accurately.

Basically, Corran demonstrated the ability of Jedi to come in contact with dark side forces, be tempted by what is offered, and to CHOOSE to not use those powers while simultaneously doing whatever possible to DEFEAT THE ENEMY. And he did it not just the one time, but several times throughout the book. When offered the chance to use his powers in anger or use abilities only associated with the dark side, Corran chose to find other ways to solve the problems, defeat his enemies, and rescue his wife (oops, spoiler! ha ha!)

Can you see where I'm going here?

Jeremiah 17:9 and Romans 11:32 were written ABOUT NON-CHRISTIANS. In Jeremiah, the Messiah had not yet come, so the hearts of the people had not been made clean by the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. In Romans, Paul is talking about all people. Since we are all "sons of Adam and daughters of Eve" we are all born into disobedience. (Job 5:7, "Yet man is born to trouble, as the sparks fly upward." Also a movie reference! 2 in one paragraph, this is so fun!) ;)

See how the message changes when Christians are the recipients (italics mine):
"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the MERCIES of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, HOLY, ACCEPTABLE to God, which is your REASONABLE service. And DO NOT BE CONFORMED TO THIS WORLD,BUT BE TRANSFORMED BY THE RENEWING OF YOUR MIND, that you may prove what is that GOOD AND ACCEPTABLE AND PERFECT WILL of God...ABHOR WHAT IS EVIL, CLING TO WHAT IS GOOD." Romans 12:1-2;9.

And again in Romans, "Now I myself am confident concerning you, my brethren, that you also are FULL OF GOODNESS, filled with ALL KNOWLEDGE, ABLE also to admonish one another." (15:14)

And in Matthew:
"Therefore YOU SHALL BE PERFECT, just as your Father in heaven is perfect." (5:48)

And in the NIV: "BE PERFECT, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." (In case there was confusion on interpretation, since the NKJV sounds future tense.)

There are tons of verses on God's grace, and it is often used along with mercy and contrasted with God's justice. Here's a bit of "KOp" (Kristin's opinion):

The Bible says "by grace you have been saved" and speaks often of God's graciousness in relation to forgiving our sins. His grace is also spoken of as the power of the Holy Spirit which enables Christians NOT to sin.

Mercy: Granting leniency...shielding from judgement...the very act of forgiveness is an act of mercy. God is merciful, so He forgives us when we sin...but He does not take away the consequences of that sin. Redeeming Love by Francine Rivers is historical fiction version of the Biblical story of Hosea and Gomer...both of which are stories of GOD'S MERCY and His relentlessness in pursuing those stuck in the pit of sin.

Justice: What we deserve. God is a just God so He cannot turn a blind eye to sin. Justice is why there is Hell...We will all be judged according to our actions and if you have not accepted God's mercy and grace, then BECAUSE He is a just God, there is no other choice than eternal separation from Him.


The original questions of this incredibly looooong post were: DOES A JEDI HAVE TO EXPERIENCE THE DARK SIDE IN ORDER TO BECOME BETTER/MORE SECURE IN THE FORCE? And: DOES A CHRISTIAN HAVE TO SIN IN ORDER TO EXPERIENCE GOD'S GRACE?

I submit that the answer to both questions is NO. Luke learned, and later saw in action through the lives of some family members and other Jedi, that while there is redemption for those that do fall or dabble in the dark side, it is possible for a Jedi to be tempted, tested, and resist. The ones who fall and are redeemed are not necessarily going to be stronger and will struggle with the consequences of their actions for the rest of their lives. Those who are tempted and resist, while sometimes scarred by their experiences, are better and stronger for it. And some can go their whole lives living in the truth and not even consider the dark side's pull, never losing their optimism.

Now remember, I'm speaking of CHRISTIANS here. I'm not referring to sins committed BEFORE becoming a Christian...I'm speaking to the idea that Christians are still "sinners saved by grace" and the "all sin and fall short" verse applies. IT DOESN'T. As a Christian, we are living IN (some say UNDER) God's grace with the Holy Spirit in us. His grace and the power of the Holy Spirit give us the ABILITY to be tempted and NOT SIN. Being tempted =/= sinning. The sin is the ACT of disobedience, not the TEMPTATION to act. Matthew 26:14 and Mark 14:38 both tell Christians to be VIGILANT, to watch and pray, in order to avoid even being tempted, because "the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak". So essentially, when we are living in the spirit, attune to God and in constant connection with Him, we should be able to spot temptation a mile off and avoid it. There is mercy and forgiveness when we mess up, but the New Testament makes it clear that messing up is to be the EXCEPTION NOT THE NORM. So a Christian living in God's grace can be doing so WITHOUT sinning, though the "grace covers a multitude of sins" when required.

I like picturing a path. It's not smooth by any means, but it's walkable. A fairly straight path from Start to Destination, though the trees along the way block our view of what's ahead and only reveals a small bit at a time. If the walker chooses to leave the path, Jesus can go and bring him back to it, but in the process the walker is going to get cut with briars, smacked in the head with tree branches, maybe sprayed by a skunk or have his ankle turned in a snake hole. He'll appreciate the path all the more, but he has a bunch of unpleasant experiences. Contrast to another walker who, while seeing similar temptations off the path (a stream of water, following an animal, the pleading of a friend to join them, some yummy berries), chooses instead to remain on the path. It's not paved by any means, there's still small holes and stones that require careful navigating and attention, and he might be hungry and thirsty along the way, but he eventually reaches the Destination sans the briars, thistles, skunks, snakes, etc etc etc. Both reach the destination. Both are aware and thankful of God's grace. But I'd much rather be the second walker, wouldn't you?