(July 2, 2013 at 5:07 am)missluckie26 Wrote: As a Christian I believed these scenes accurately portrayed the essence of Jesus's sacrifice.I remember seeing the movie thinking how they cribbed from Mel Gibson and his portrayal of the Passion. Thing is, Aslan is not omnipotent. The forces of deep magic and the curse on the land was outside his control. A sacrifice makes more sense under circumstances like these.
The Lion Aslan playing the part of Jesus dying in exchange for a son of Adam. The queen obviously Satan. The stone Altar representing the Law.
It's like the soldier who leaps on the grenade to use his body to absorb the explosion and shrapnel. In so doing, he sacrifices himself to save his fellow soldiers. The grenade is outside the soldier's control and self-sacrifice was the only option.
Self-sacrifice, as an event in story-telling, makes sense only:
1. If the threat being averted is outside the sacrificee's control.
2. If the process by which the sacrifice averts, nullifies or alleviates the threat is understood.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist