The Transformers and the Origin of Faith

[Dja Majista]

I'll explain later.

[Dja Majista]

rar, ok, it's time to get back to business. Sorry I took so long. I had to read over this whole thread again to refresh my memory of your argument. That and I spent all Tuesday doing my research paper.

Sept 24, 2007 20:41:03 GMT -5 pinstrike said:

It is a fair point to bring up Megatron's seeming absence from the plot set to break his alleigances and credibility. But certainly he must have had a hand in the politics of the Pharisees, and perhaps even employed the one we call Judas. But it is also to be noted that, perhaps earth was chosen for their "home-base", and the Transformers may have often left the planet to conquer or defend others in Megatron's grander scheme of total domination of the Universe. His attempts to influence and enslave worlds neither began nor ended with earth, making it entirely possible that the Autobots planned Operation Christ to coincide with one of his absences.

You know, I've been looking for a hole in this part, but it turns out your argument is more airtight than I thought, and perhaps moreso than you thought. In the NT, it says somewhere that God wouldn't send anymore messengers after Jesus. From your side, that would be ample evidence to show that the autobot, Christ, was trying to ensure he had the last say, in saying there would be no one else. So sure enough, Megatron finds out about this and sends Mohammad?

But there's still a few problems left. With the idea of two factions competing for the attention of the people, it seems necessary that they would try to outdo eachother in miracles. But both seem to insist on people relying on faith, merely complemented by miracles. With that said, I would have expected that Mohammad, if you want to label him as Megatron's messiah that is, would display some miracles. But he didn't. When people asked him to perform miracles, he insisted that they wouldn't believe him if he did.

Another problem is we still have an autobot antagonizing an autobot; Jesus antagonizing Satan; the Christ autobot antagonizing Optimus Prime. Jesus rebukes Satan and his demons several times in the NT. (And speaking of demons, we haven't established their role here yet, and from the bible they seem to be subservient to Satan, or in this case Optimus.)

But speaking of Satan, I'd like to take this even further. Many of the views--most of the views--we have about Satan come from Milton's Paradise Lost. Many Christians treat the material as if it's canon without even knowing it. But really it's just a guy trying to explain the ways of God, a theodicy. And much of it focuses on Satan. In fact the first time "the satan" (also the Great Adversary) appears in the bible is in Job. Regarding Genesis, that was not necessarily Satan. It was a serpent, but not necessarily Satan. I just wanted to put that out there, but I'm sure your theory will allow for the Satan character to manifest himself as a snake. Just know that that's not canonically true. So anyway, "the satan" first appears in Job as a sort of defense attorney. He's not necessarily evil, but he is challenging God to test his servant Job. So God gives Job hell, and yes Job maintains his fear of the Lord. But he questions God openly:

I loathe my life; I will give free utterance to my complaint; I will speak in the bitterness of my soul. I will say to God, Do not condemn me; let me know why you contend against me. Does it seem good to you to oppress, to despise the work of your hands and favor the schemes of the wicked? --Job 10:1-3 NRSV

This is Job speaking here. Do you see how freely he expresses himself? He never curses God, but he questions him vehemently. So it's not really the same kind of fear you might be thinking of. Job expresses his anger to God. And when all is said and done, God gives Job twice what he had in return for his loss.

But anyway, the Satan in Job you have compared to starscream. Does that mean the demon's wreaking havoc on people in the NT also belong to Starscream. If that's the case, then why would the listen to the autobot known as Christ? Why would they fear him?

The devil makes most of his appearances in the NT. Satan is rarely ever referred to in the OT. Demons are the same way. I'm not sure about this, but I think the only time in the OT where demons show up is in Daniel. But the gospels I believe are the first place where people actually start becoming demon possessed.

As for the feeding of the thousands...and I'm ashamed I didn't immediately think of this, and in fact had to call upon Esteemed Leader for assistance...It's not the creation of matter...It's matter Transplacement!

It's what their entire transforming physiology is based on. The transformations they undergo are due, first, to the scanning of a vehicle type and adapting their body structure to shapeshift into it. This means certain parts are transplaced elswhere on the robot's body, and this matter is itself physically changed in order to do so. It has also happened that Transformers have used the energy from their Sparks to "teleport" other objects from planets away!

So, quite simply, Christ used his Spark's energy to transplace enough matter to feed thousands in that one given area. The bread and fish were most likely taken from thousands of sources so as not to draw attention to their apparent dissappearance.

Alright works for me. But what about the eathquake, in Matthew 27:51 along with all the other things? Do you think the autobots could have remained hidden and cause an eathquake, as well as make rocks split? As for the saints being raised, and the temple curtain being torn, you could probably argue that pretty easily. But I'd say the earthquake causes some problems though.

And I commend your information regarding the transferrance of religious texts, though I still find it hard to believe that human politics never played a roll. I mean, if all of these texts were never significantly altered, then why did the Church remove the books of the Apocrypha? Why, then, was the Book of Enoch removed? Why are the majority of the gospels absent from the accepted Scripture? If political motivation altered the Bible's table of contents, is it that farfetched to believe that the contents themselves underwent serious review and revision?

I believe that the stories the monks got and the stories that they transcribed were as similar as possible, given that your information is valid (which I believe it is), but the scriptures from which they were copying--How can we really know how warped the story became before it was written the FIRST time? The accuracy of the original documents themselves comes into question here. But, in that respect, I suppose is where Faith kicks in.

Yeah, while I know a bit about how things were reproduced, canonization is certainly not my specialty. I might spend some time researching it this summer, but who knows? Anyway, I think it's important that I explain a few things. The bible, or at least the OT, is loaded with books that are not intended to be taken as accurate from a technical standpoint. Most of them are in response to historical events, but not all of them are necessarily historically and technically true. The stories are meant to convey messages about God. As far as history is concerned, books like 1&2 Kings, 1&2 Samuel, and 1&2 Chronicles are concerned with giving historical accounts, and there are more, though I can't remember which ones. Anyway, the point is, not all of them do that. The fact is, if you examine the technical details in every book of the bible, you will find contradictions. That doesn't mean the books are false though. Again, the message is the focus, and usually that message is geared toward answering Jewish theological questions of the time, like "why do people suffer?" or something.

As for the Apocrypha, I have one in my access bible, but the apocrypha is interesting because it contains an edited version of Esther. (On another note, yes, many of the books in the OT were "edited," But the editions usually aren't trying to hide. There appear to be two in Job, but they are illuminated by a clear cut change in style from prose to poetry to prose. And it's speculated that the entire Torah originates from for different sources blended together. Otherwise, editions do not necessarily mean that someone was trying to screw with God's intended message.) The original hebrew version of Esther can be found in the OT. But the Greek version found in the apocrypha is packed with editions that significantly alter the message of the original.

Now another thing I think you should know is that many of the OT's stories were passed down orally before they were first written down. Now naturally you'd think that since it was passed down orally, it's bound to have been significantly altered over time. And sure, that may have accounted for some of the technical inaccuracies, but that's not necessarily true. We think it's human nature to distort things because when people like us try to play "telephone" we see the message distorted dramatically everytime. Why is that? Simple; we simply are not very careful with words. We wield them liberally and don't place nearly as much importance on them as the people of ancient times. The Jews of the ancient world were very meticulous in making sure they gave the stories to their children/apprentices just as they had heard them. We have to realize that just because stories were passed down through oral tradition doesn't mean they were utterly distorted as we would see it going down with how we treat words.

Yeah ok, so now you know that I just took Old Testament 101. Let me know if there's anything else you want to know, and I'll answer it to the best of my ability.

[pinstrike]

Another problem is we still have an autobot antagonizing an autobot; Jesus antagonizing Satan; the Christ autobot antagonizing Optimus Prime. Jesus rebukes Satan and his demons several times in the NT. (And speaking of demons, we haven't established their role here yet, and from the bible they seem to be subservient to Satan, or in this case Optimus.)

The Autobots believe in the greater good. Any means that leads to that greater good is fully endorsed. The Autobots chose Christ to go speak out against a materialistic, vicious and vindictive Satan. A Satan who called himself Lord over the Earth in the last temptation. As of Christ's coming, Megatron still ruled the earth to an extent, and Starscream was his croney, and would do terrible, evil things in HIS name. He's Starscream! He's greedy and egotistical, and he would not claim his own ventures in Megatron's name, but rather his own name, so he was viewed as something evil and destructive in and of himself--no evident ties to the god they worshipped. So Christ was, more than likely, speaking out against the idea of cruelty, greed, avarice and egotism that had swept through the idea of Satan. Remember--Optimus was the starting point for an adversary against the pre-established Megatron. Starscream picked up the reins and that's where the rest of what we canonize comes from in regards to Satan.
Not only that, but Optimus and the Autobots were trying to change people's minds about the lives their god (Megatron) was trying to have them lead. By claiming to represent God, Their Christ lied about who was who folr the greater good. The Satan they knew (Optimus Prime) and the Satan he argued against were not really the same being. The acts and attitudes of the Decepticon forces (Starscream) that had been pinned on Optimus were being argued against. The fact that they were still, in essence, blaming Optimus, was inconsequential to the greater good. Besides, Optimus has died for a cause a lot more than once...I think he can take some self-designed slander--all for the greater good.

Alright works for me. But what about the eathquake, in Matthew 27:51 along with all the other things? Do you think the autobots could have remained hidden and cause an eathquake, as well as make rocks split? As for the saints being raised, and the temple curtain being torn, you could probably argue that pretty easily. But I'd say the earthquake causes some problems though.

They are GIANT robots. With explosives and plasma guns. Giant explosives. Giant plasma guns.

We think it's human nature to distort things because when people like us try to play "telephone" we see the message distorted dramatically everytime. Why is that? Simple; we simply are not very careful with words. We wield them liberally and don't place nearly as much importance on them as the people of ancient times. The Jews of the ancient world were very meticulous in making sure they gave the stories to their children/apprentices just as they had heard them. We have to realize that just because stories were passed down through oral tradition doesn't mean they were utterly distorted as we would see it going down with how we treat words.

I have a hard time with this. The only reason we know this much is through what may or may not have been altered texts and orally transferred stories. I mean, we cannot know in any way what value the Jews placed on stories. And the whole idea of human incompetence at maintaining a solid view of things is where the whole Theory of Transformers and the Origin of Faith kind of began. I mean, exxagerations, misunderstandings and lies are and always have been an undeniable part of human interaction.

And I just thought of something. About why all of this on Earth and for Humanity, all of this politics and trouble when other planets were simply warred over and won or lost. Perhaps we were, at the time, the most interesting or multi-dimensional beings they'd come across in their travels. Perhaps we still would be. I mean, even their neighbour planets are mostly robots or similarly silicon-based organisms. The only near-organics they've known until us were the tentacled/cyborg Quintessons, a violents and technical race [whose technology may have had a hand in the evolution of Cybertronians, but that's a long story] with very single-file thought patterns. Us? We were a fully organic carbon-based biped life-form with the capacity for knowledge. We were a whole new thing, something to mold and if either side succeeded, could sway the tides of the war. In fact, that's what the cartoon itself was about. So, it all really comes together. And our constantly being told by God that we are "chosen", that's where that comes from.

[Dja Majista]

Another problem is we still have an autobot antagonizing an autobot; Jesus antagonizing Satan; the Christ autobot antagonizing Optimus Prime. Jesus rebukes Satan and his demons several times in the NT. (And speaking of demons, we haven't established their role here yet, and from the bible they seem to be subservient to Satan, or in this case Optimus.)

The Autobots believe in the greater good. Any means that leads to that greater good is fully endorsed. The Autobots chose Christ to go speak out against a materialistic, vicious and vindictive Satan. A Satan who called himself Lord over the Earth in the last temptation. As of Christ's coming, Megatron still ruled the earth to an extent, and Starscream was his croney, and would do terrible, evil things in HIS name. He's Starscream! He's greedy and egotistical, and he would not claim his own ventures in Megatron's name, but rather his own name, so he was viewed as something evil and destructive in and of himself--no evident ties to the god they worshipped. So Christ was, more than likely, speaking out against the idea of cruelty, greed, avarice and egotism that had swept through the idea of Satan. Remember--Optimus was the starting point for an adversary against the pre-established Megatron. Starscream picked up the reins and that's where the rest of what we canonize comes from in regards to Satan.
Not only that, but Optimus and the Autobots were trying to change people's minds about the lives their god (Megatron) was trying to have them lead. By claiming to represent God, Their Christ lied about who was who folr the greater good. The Satan they knew (Optimus Prime) and the Satan he argued against were not really the same being. The acts and attitudes of the Decepticon forces (Starscream) that had been pinned on Optimus were being argued against. The fact that they were still, in essence, blaming Optimus, was inconsequential to the greater good. Besides, Optimus has died for a cause a lot more than once...I think he can take some self-designed slander--all for the greater good.

Actually I figured of all points, that one would be the easiest to squash. But what about this one:

With the idea of two factions competing for the attention of the people, it seems necessary that they would try to outdo eachother in miracles. But both seem to insist on people relying on faith, merely complemented by miracle.

That was my main challenge. Sorry if it wasn't clear.

Alright works for me. But what about the eathquake, in Matthew 27:51 along with all the other things? Do you think the autobots could have remained hidden and cause an eathquake, as well as make rocks split? As for the saints being raised, and the temple curtain being torn, you could probably argue that pretty easily. But I'd say the earthquake causes some problems though.

They are GIANT robots. With explosives and plasma guns. Giant explosives. Giant plasma guns.

Hence, why I said cause an earthquake and remain hidden. Can they turn invisible or something?

I have a hard time with this. The only reason we know this much is through what may or may not have been altered texts and orally transferred stories. I mean, we cannot know in any way what value the Jews placed on stories. And the whole idea of human incompetence at maintaining a solid view of things is where the whole Theory of Transformers and the Origin of Faith kind of began. I mean, exxagerations, misunderstandings and lies are and always have been an undeniable part of human interaction.

Well it's funny you mentioned that. Because the OT by no means tries to convey one solid view of God. The views change, and there's nothing clandestine about it. It is a collection of theological accounts over the centuries that offer insight into how the relationship between God and his people clearly changed over time. People saw God differently, but the point is all of those nearly contradicting views have been preserved. God is portrayed as extremely multidimensional, moreso than most Christians seem to know. And those dimensions of him come out during different periods. In essence, the OT has a very honest feel to it. It shows God for his goodness, as well as his vehemence. In Job, and I know someone's gonna bite my head off for this, it suggests that goodness and justice is not what God is about. I believe though, and someone might argue with me here too, that throughout the bible, God is always a God of love. And love produces a LOT of qualities, both seemingly good and seemingly bad.

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is, the bible works. It works within itself, much like your theory but there's a reason it's different. To be honest, I don't really consider anything in the OT to be the basis of my faith. Most of the facts that support my faith lie around Jesus, his works, and his disciples, and their works. But the OT contains accounts that were not all necessarily intended to be works of non-fiction. The messages are to be taken as true, sure, but as I said technicalities are not the concern for some of these books. And the reason I trust those messages are mainly because Jesus went off of them, and Jesus is, empirically speaking, very likely to be the Son of God, YHWH, in the OT.

And I just thought of something. About why all of this on Earth and for Humanity, all of this politics and trouble when other planets were simply warred over and won or lost. Perhaps we were, at the time, the most interesting or multi-dimensional beings they'd come across in their travels. Perhaps we still would be. I mean, even their neighbour planets are mostly robots or similarly silicon-based organisms. The only near-organics they've known until us were the tentacled/cyborg Quintessons, a violents and technical race [whose technology may have had a hand in the evolution of Cybertronians, but that's a long story] with very single-file thought patterns. Us? We were a fully organic carbon-based biped life-form with the capacity for knowledge. We were a whole new thing, something to mold and if either side succeeded, could sway the tides of the war. In fact, that's what the cartoon itself was about. So, it all really comes together. And our constantly being told by God that we are "chosen", that's where that comes from.

You're getting into the meaning of life here. Why don't you join one of the philosophy discussions we have going on? You'd be a good man for it.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

This thread needs to continue.

[Dja Majista]

You wanna hear us ramble more? Anyway, I haven't seen pinstrike in a while. I was kinda hoping he'd reply on that suicide thread. I made a really long post.

[pinstrike]

Now. Perhaps the time has come to look at other world religions to see, if the Transformers were in the hub of the Three major world religions, and obviously had an affect on Western spirituality...what of Islam?

That's right. Cobra Commander wasn't the first human ally Megatron enlisted to carry out his destructive cause.
You wanna know who the first one was?
Muhammed.

The archangel Gabriel who whispered the secrets of the universe and the vengeful Lord's highest cause into Muhammed's ear was none other than a Decepticon, if not Megatron himself. Probably, come to think of it, Laserbeak or Soundwave.
What better way to destroy a race than finding those who share a penchant for destruction and harvesting their abilites to confound the efforts of the opponent?
Megatron is a wiley motherfucker.
He did it with Cobra Commander. He did it with Muhammed, and BAM. Islam.

I've read the Q'aran. It does give explicit rules as to the killing of those unworthy or unwilling to the cause. It does not give lenience to "failing yet again." The obsession with destruction of life points immediately to Decepticon influence; and, given that we have established that they could have easily been a large part of the construction of Christian faith due to their presence in the Middle-east/Mesopotamian region at the same time, I find it curious that this only just occurred to me. Dja Master (and any others), your thoughts.

[Dja Majista]

Feb 28, 2009 6:58:05 GMT -5 pinstrike said:

Now. Perhaps the time has come to look at other world religions to see, if the Transformers were in the hub of the Three major world religions, and obviously had an affect on Western spirituality...what of Islam?

Ok, I've read only pieces of the Q'aran. So I'm not sure I'm very equipped for this. Nonetheless, I'm interested to see where you're going with it.

That's right. Cobra Commander wasn't the first human ally Megatron enlisted to carry out his destructive cause.
You wanna know who the first one was?
Muhammed.

The archangel Gabriel who whispered the secrets of the universe and the vengeful Lord's highest cause into Muhammed's ear was none other than a Decepticon, if not Megatron himself. Probably, come to think of it, Laserbeak or Soundwave.
What better way to destroy a race than finding those who share a penchant for destruction and harvesting their abilites to confound the efforts of the opponent?
Megatron is a wiley motherfucker.
He did it with Cobra Commander. He did it with Muhammed, and BAM. Islam.

So how are you proposing Megatron uses Muhammad? Does he tell him everything about him, a Transformer, being the God everyone has come to know? Does he completely decieve him? Surely you're thinking some mix of the two; the question is which truths does he reveal to the prophet and which lies does he tell?

I've read the Q'aran. It does give explicit rules as to the killing of those unworthy or unwilling to the cause. It does not give lenience to "failing yet again." The obsession with destruction of life points immediately to Decepticon influence; and, given that we have established that they could have easily been a large part of the construction of Christian faith due to their presence in the Middle-east/Mesopotamian region at the same time, I find it curious that this only just occurred to me. Dja Master (and any others), your thoughts.

The expression "Kill the infadels," I would imagine, found support at a time when Muslims had hostile neighbors. But obviously, when a religion that seems to endorse this kind of violence moves into a peaceful environment where common sense ethics says killing "infadels" is wrong, it can take on one of three manifestations. Some remain faithful to the original interpretation, and become terrorists, which is rare, because frankly that is a very inconvenient lifestyle. Others who also believe the orginal interpretation, either simply abandon the religion all together, or merely that part, which generates a sort of quasi Islam. Still others, and this probably includes most of them, search for a different possible interpretation. This interpretation can look at the explicit wording of the passage in question, OR it may look at the context and say something like, "God was talking those people back then, but not us right now." So in short the three manifestations are 'to uphold', 'to abandon', and 'to revise' respectively. That said, there has clearly been a widely accepted revision of that interpretation. Is it warranted? Only the scriptures can tell.

I've read about a very conservative Muslim tribe in Africa that embraces peaceful coexistence to a fault as mandated by their holy book. Think of rules like, "don't attack another nation unless they attack you three times." It's stuff like that. Now do you think these interpretations are unfounded? Furthermore, shouldn't Megatron have foreseen this problem, and made at least those specific passages be immune to revision?