MovieChat Forums > Prince of Darkness (1987) Discussion > I'm confused - do both God and Anti-God ...

I'm confused - do both God and Anti-God exist in this film's universe?

posted 9 years ago by Drevnibor
13 replies | jump to latest

Here is Dr. Birack's explanation, given in this film:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYZIU1uIS2w
I find it confusing.

He says to Father Loomis that what his religion is telling him, is essentially correct - there is a divine being (God) able to control every sub-atomic particle.
However, he says that every particle has an anti-particle, and maybe that God doesn't reside in our universe, but in its mirror-image (the anti-universe), and so, that makes it the Anti-God, a power of pure evil, instead of good, as we believed.

What I find confusing is this - if every particle has an anti-particle, and our universe has a its anti-universe, wouldn't that mean there is a God too, not just the Anti-God?
However, Dr. Birack seems to suggest that religious teachings were wrong, and that there is no good God, only the evil God.
Loomis confirms this by saying they (the Church) were telling them what they wanted to hear - to believe it (God) to be divine light.

Furthermore, there is no mention of good God in the entire film.

And, finally,when the scientists manage to decipher the ancient language, it reads (referring to the Anti-God):
"a god who once walked the earth before man... but was somehow banished to the dark side."
That confuses me even more.
Who banished him?
How can one banish an omnipotent being?
And if he was a god in our universe, that would mean (if we follow the particle/anti-particle logic), that in the anti-universe, there was his mirror image - God.
Or maybe that ancient text was incorrect, and was only based on the belief of the people who wrote it - maybe the Anti-God was always in the anti-universe?

Thoughts?

[–] MadSimian 9 years ago

Here's something to possibly blow your mind...

What if the Anti-God IS God? One who is always creating from their POV. But, since they exist in a diametrically-opposed universe, he/she/its creative influence there is perceived as destructive influence here. AND, once the Big Crunch happens, he/she/it will then be creative in our universe once again and perceived as destructive in the other. With maybe a third form that exists at the exact points when the universe is neither expanding or contracting and is a balance between the two other forms(neither creative nor destructive).

Actually, the idea is almost hinduistic in nature(I am referring to the triumvirate of God in the forms of Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva) and could possibly add a whole new subtle layer to the movie's take on religion.

**edit**OR, now that I've thought on it some more, it could also be seen as yin and yang...two diametrically opposing yet similar forces perpetually circling each other.

I would like, if I may, to take you on a strange journey.

[–] Drevnibor 9 years ago

What if the Anti-God IS God? One who is always creating from their POV. But, since they exist in a diametrically-opposed universe, he/she/its creative influence there is perceived as destructive influence here.

Hmmm... yes, but that is basically already implied in the film - Anti-God IS the one who we thought to be The God of our religions.
But if everything has an anti-matter, than that Evil God must have a Good God as his counterpart; however, the film implies there is only one god (the destructive one), and I find that confusing - you cannot have two opposite universes with only one God.

**edit**OR, now that I've thought on it some more, it could also be seen as yin and yang...two diametrically opposing yet similar forces perpetually circling each other.

Hmmm... Carpenter does like a fair share of Eastern mysticism, but I don't think we've seen any evidence of it in this film.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (9347176) 9 years ago

I always took Birack's supposition "Maybe he's Anti-God, bringing darkness instead of light," coupled with his foreshadowing introduction of quantum physics to his class, "say goodbye to classical reality," to mean that Birack believes their universe is the Anti-Universe, in which Anti-God resides. Anti-God had to be brought back from whatever "dark side" that space Jesus and company banished him to, and his reconstituted son was taking care of all that.

Also, the "every particle has an anti-particle" line presupposes that the supreme being(s) is composed of particles in some way. I always found that idea to be a little disconcerting. I like my deities to be completely ethereal and without substance.

-Rod

[–] mider2009 9 years ago

I thought there was god and then anti god. Like Jesus and then satan in the fluid

[–] BigRich 9 years ago

Furthermore, there is no mention of good God in the entire film.

And, finally,when the scientists manage to decipher the ancient language, it reads (referring to the Anti-God):
"a god who once walked the earth before man... but was somehow banished to the dark side."
That confuses me even more.
Who banished him?
How can one banish an omnipotent being?

IMHO, I don't think there was ever a "good God" in this movie. It was clearly stated in the video you posted that they (the religious folks) were mislead. Birack mentions a Universal Mind that resides in the mirror universe, and later the priest says, "Why weren't we told the truth?", which to my understanding, there never was a [good]God. You took what was said a little bit out of context and left some words out. Here's what was said:

The container was buried somewhere in the middle east eons ago by the father of Satan, a god who once walked the earth before man but was somehow banished to the dark side. Apparently, the father buried his son inside the container.

This is not referring to Father God, or God the Creator, or "good God" as you stated. What this is saying is that Satan was in the container. His father, as seen at the end of the movie, was in the mirror world (banished), and Satan was going to free him.

I'm not a religious man, but let's take what we know about religion and what was said in the movie. Shortly after what was mentioned above, the lady (Lisa) goes on to say:

Christ comes to warn us, he was of extra-terrestrial ancestry, but a human-like race. Finally they determine Christ is crazy but he is also gaining a lot of power...

This is all that is mentioned of anything remotely related to the "good God" you're referring to I can only assume, as Jesus is the son of [good]God. It could be interpreted as Jesus was the mirror of Satan, or possibly not, considering he wasn't from our world; He was extra-terrestrial. Also, after Lisa was possessed, and after she types "I Live", she types the following:

You will not be saved by the Holy Ghost.
You will not be saved by the god Plutonium.
In fact, YOU WILL NOT BE SAVED!

Now I just Bing'd "god Plutonium", and found a Yahoo! question that read like this:

Jesus, The Holy Ghost And The God Plutonium?
Was Jesus Christ an Alien, meaning that the interpretation of him as the "Son of God" is open debate since Satan & the Anti-God could technically be considered aliens from another dimension.

Is the God Plutonium a reference to the "Positive-God", as opposed to the Anti-God, or to Nuclear Weapons? So If the Four Horseman of the Apocalypse Come Then nothing in the Heavens or on Earth can save you...not even nuclear weapons.
Plutonium represents the most powerful substance under mankind control. In fact, it is a man made element, it does not exist in nature.
Well, technically, the hydrogen bomb is the most powerful force that man controls, but that's really just a fusion bomb that uses a plutonium fission bomb as a reactor.I interpreted this to mean nuclear weapons.
I interpreted Plutonium to be the father of the Alien who was Jesus Christ...
Because, if Satan were to come out of the mirror, humans would then probably resort to nuclear weapons in a last act of despair.

But science is always ever changing. Birack, if I'm not mistaken, is a theoretical physicist, right? Just because he's said every particle has an anti-particle may not pertain to "good God" or Jesus. But you want an answer to who banished the father of Satan. That is left to interpretation my friend, sorry. It was probably in that book, but as they stated, it was erased, and written over.

_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.

[–] Drevnibor 9 years ago

Yeah, but I still think Carpenter could have avoided the confusion, by mentioning particles and anti-particles, since that claims there are two sides of a coin to everything, which also means two Gods.

[–] Navaros 9 years ago

"Why weren't we told the truth?", which to my understanding, there never was a [good]God.

That's not what that question means at all.

On the contrary, what it means is:

1. "Why did my leaders suppress the truth of Jesus' warning that satan's [very dangerous] physical essence is imprisoned in a container on earth?"

And,

2. "Why did my leaders suppress the truth of Jesus' warning about the existence of satan's father?"

By the way, in addition to what I've just said being obvious from within the same scene in which the priest states the question, it is also corroborated by the priest's dialogue in a different scene:

A decision was made to characterize pure evil as a spiritual force [as opposed to physical substance]...a stupid lie!...A substance, malevolence. That was the truth. Asleep...until now.

In addition to all of that, the priest also affirms the existence of the good God by:

1. Reading the Bible before the final fight.

2. Praying to the good God before the final fight.

3. Giving credit to the good God for their victory over satan, claiming they achieved it "by the grace of [the good] God."

[–] Navaros 9 years ago

you want an answer to who banished the father of Satan. That is left to interpretation my friend

No it's not, because there is only one possibility: a member of the good God's Godhead. No one else would be powerful enough to banish the father of satan. The only question open to interpretation is which one out of the three members of the Godhead did it.

That may be related to why satan mentioned the Holy Ghost to the dude...satan might well have wanted to mock and assert false superiority over the Holy Ghost because satan was peeved at the Holy Ghost for banishing his father.

[–] MadSimian 9 years ago

The only problem is that, according to this movie, there is no supernatural God, Jesus is an extraterrestrial from a human-like race and everything that happened is caused naturally based on physics we haven't discovered yet let alone begin to understand.

The "Anti-God" is more akin to Cthulhu, a highly destructive and powerful creature in its own right, but NOT the ultimate personification of evil itself like the Devil is portrayed as in the Bible.

A nozh scrap any time you say.

[–] jpssteveshanahan (482) 2 years ago

"The "Anti-God" is more akin to Cthulhu, a highly destructive and powerful creature in its own right".

I never thought of it that way. Excellent observation. I just recently started getting into HP Lovecraft.

[–] Navaros 9 years ago

I can see why you are confused by the film Drenivbor. It's not your fault though.

Your OP does describe what the film says accurately.

However, I believe that due to sloppy screenwriting and/or editing in that one scene, the film ends up saying something that Carpenter didn't mean for it to say. That sloppy screenwriting and/or editing is why you (and other viewers) are confused.

What I think Carpenter meant to say in the film is this:

"The good God exists, and he controls the good particles in our universe. Conversely, the evil god (who is satan's father) also exists, and the evil god lives in the mirror universe and controls the anti-particles there."

Alternatively, if Carpenter did mean to say what the film [as it is erroneously presented] actually says (i.e. that no good God exists, and that only the evil anti-god exists), then that would beg the question: who controls the good/normal particles? atheists would say the anti-god does, because it makes them feel good to support atheism --- but the film contradicts the idea that the anti-god controls the good/normal particles, since to do so would require the anti-god to bring goodness and light, which the film says that the anti-god does not do.

Furthermore, Jesus is one part of the Godhead which comprises the good God, and the film affirms Jesus' existence and his good actions via his warnings to mankind. Likewise, either the good God in the form of Jesus' Father, or the good God in the form of Jesus Himself, or the good God in the form of the Holy Spirit, would necessarily have been the One to banish the anti-god to the dark side/mirror universe (the Asian lady says this happened "somehow," but only a member of the good God's Godhead would have the power to do that...so the "somehow" must be the good God.

Plus, if Carpenter really wanted to affirm that the idea there is no good God, then he would have not have included scenes at the end of the priest reading the Bible, praying to the good God for help, and giving credit to the good God for providing help.

Ergo, based on what the film says:

a> the atheist claim that the anti-god controls the good particles too cannot hold.

and

b> The good God must exist.

[–] danielecs93 (0) a year ago

[deleted]

[–] danielecs93 (0) a year ago

[deleted]