What do the Bible and Terminator 2 have in common?

A friend of mine suggested this post to me. I pass it along to you fine folks. Discuss.

http://www.overthinkingit.com/2012/02/27/the-biblical-terminator-heteroglossic-discourse-poetic-authority/

I thought it was an interesting read, although I tend to be more interested in what creators intend to say rather than what elements present or mirror a philosophical view by "accident".

I'd also add that his assumption about "contradictions" in the Bible are poorly presented and supported. He seems only interested, like many modern "philosophers", in discussing interesting ideas and uninterested in pursuing truth. And his use of language regarding the Bible is sloppy, which immediately destroys his credibility with me in trying to make a philosophical observation.

I picked up on his lack of interest in truth in the comments below the article. One reader attempts to point out that the message of wrath and punishment is present in the New Testament, not just the Old. (The author was using the old, argument that God is all about wrath in the OT and all about love and pacifism in the NT.)

The author's response:
Perhaps it’s a mistake to gloss over the entirety of the New Testament as “pacifist,” but it was a generalization I was willing to ignore because it supported the premise without being wholly incorrect.

In other words, he was willing to ignore some of the facts because they would weaken the point he was trying to make. (RED FLAG!)

I picked up on his sloppy use of words in some comments further down. (It seems he did, too.)

Poster:
I think we can distinguish between heteroglossia (which is to say, contradiction: we infer “different tongues” from inconsistency) and complexity. I can support eating poutine in general without wanting to eat it right now for breakfast. It’s undeniable that the Bible is long and complicated, but “contradictory” is a very high bar to pass...

Author:
That makes sense to me, and far more concise than I was.


So the author didn't seem to know the difference between a contradiction and a complexity or paradox (a perceived, though not necessarily actual, contradiction). And referencing a Wikipedia entry as representing the current state of the Biblical Criticism debate didn't help his intellectual credibility either.

So while I think the premise of his post and his blog, "Over Thinking It", are interesting, I think he may be the wrong author in this case, as he strikes me to have UNDER thought what he is posting about.

I particularly had trouble with the 'contradiction' part myself. Especially using the three-dollar word 'heteroglossia' didn't help.

While it may not be exactly what the creator of T2 intended, and the author obviously was, as you note, 'UNDER thinking' things, I think these kinds of discussions can help get the ball rolling towards more meaty and concrete ideas. Think of this post as a 'gateway.'

Anyway, I thought it was an interesting viewpoint, if not terribly orthodox or well-thought.

cleireac wrote:I think these kinds of discussions can help get the ball rolling towards more meaty and concrete ideas. Think of this post as a 'gateway.'

Absolutely agree. Didn't mean to downplay the potential for this as a useful springboard to good conversation. And despite my preferences, I see plenty of value in examining the ideas creators didn't intend to put in their art, but that show up anyway. For example, in addition to what the Wachowski's DID mean to say in the Matrix trilogy, there are some very interesting ideas that pop up that they almost certainly DIDN'T intend.

Man, I gotta start actually reading the posted links before I go reading the comments and followup posts. now I'm not sure I want to go reading this guys post.

Paeter wrote:

cleireac wrote:I think these kinds of discussions can help get the ball rolling towards more meaty and concrete ideas. Think of this post as a 'gateway.'

Absolutely agree. Didn't mean to downplay the potential for this as a useful springboard to good conversation. And despite my preferences, I see plenty of value in examining the ideas creators didn't intend to put in their art, but that show up anyway. For example, in addition to what the Wachowski's DID mean to say in the Matrix trilogy, there are some very interesting ideas that pop up that they almost certainly DIDN'T intend.

I know once in a while I'll be coming up with a story and I get one of those "happy accidents" that take me by surprise

Rickster wrote:
I know once in a while I'll be coming up with a story and I get one of those "happy accidents" that take me by surprise

It's extremely common for me. I have often concluded that the Holy Spirit likes to jump in and join my writing process in those moments. Some of the most interesting turns in my writing (to me at least) happen because I accidentally paint myself into a corner and have to find a way to write myself out of it.

Us creative folks sometimes think we come up with so many unique, original ideas, but God is writing his own story on top of ours, whether we realize it or not!

Okay, so a little something that I've observed about the Terminator movies, that I think people get confused about; Terminator designations. People seemed to get all confused about whether the first two Arnold-Terminators were T-800s and the third Arnold-Termintor was a T-850, or if they were all T-101's. People argue over this more than they consider a third option. In Judgement Day, the Terminator says, "Cyberdyne Systems Model 101." Look at the original movie poster for The Terminator, were you can see a digital designation in the Terminator's sunglasses: CSM-101. Not T-800, not T-101, CSM-101.

And talking about contradictions, in a non-serious way, in the Terminator 3 Rise of the Machines the Terminator says about the second Arnold Terminator, "That was a different T-101." Which is one of the lines of dialogue that causes some confusion perhaps. In the third movie, Skynet's fledgling machine army has been constructed by a different organization, Cyber Research Systems; so maybe there's justification for the change of Terminator prefix designations at that point.

Talking more seriously of contradiction, and not speaking for myself or anybody really, I would tentatively say that just because Christians feel that they have resolved seeming contradictions in the Bible amongst themselves does not mean that every human on the planet has come to this conclusion. If the argument is settled for Christians, does that mean that the issue is settled? Who does it need to be settle for, or clarified to? If the blogger has arrived at a personal conclusion about the perception of contradictions in the Bible, then maybe that's the best he's been able to come up with, outside of a Christian perspective. I don't know if he is a Christian or not. The only critique I will venture regarding contradictions is that this seems like an odd point to explore as a parallel point between Terminator 2 and The Bible. It just seems a bit abstract, is all.

I get the impression he's just having a little bit of fun trying to build up T2 to a higher level; he may simply be considering the Bible as a work of incredibly epic proportions and is not interested in exploring it as truth, if he's not Christian he would simply see that as an exercise in exploring Christian truth. It's like a game of "Let's spot Biblical influence in Sci-Fi/Fantasy/or just fiction in general!" Seeing the metaphorical influence of the Gospel in Robocop or The Lord of the Rings movies is what the respective filmakers intended in each of those cases, and you might as well throw in Superman the Movie for exhibiting really obvious echoes of Biblical influence, too. Tim Curry's character in Legend certainly seems the epitome of a Biblically-Satanic caliber antagonist.

This whole thing seems more of a fun Fan Zone topic, ideas to play with; I didn't get the impression the blogger was even remotely intending anything beyond that. A quick glance at Overthinking It's About section says they're mainly interested in overthinking Pop Culture, not truth or Truth.