MovieChat Forums > Agora (2009) Discussion > Why Are Christians So Defensive?

Why Are Christians So Defensive?


It is both bizarre and hilarious that Christians get so upset at fictionalized movies like Da Vinci Code and Agora. I suppose part of it has to do with the notion of "Christian as Victim", which really hasnt been valid since the days of the Roman Coliseum. As an evolutionist, should I get as upset over a movie like Godzilla because it contravenes all "accepted" tenets of the theory of evolution? That would be ludicrous, of course, just as ludicrous as the sanctimonious attacks of the uber-Christians about these types of movies. Chill out -- it's a movie not a doctoral thesis or the "word of God."

reply

The Da Vinci Code is full of flat out lies. If you know a priest, ask him to separate truth from fiction: 1% truth that there is a Vatican City and a Pope lives there. 99% lies for the rest of the story.

The New York Rangers suck. And Sidney Crosby is a cry baby!

reply

I thought the movie made everybody an *beep* except the main character. So I don't really see what reason anybody has to get offended...

...except that we live in the world where everybody, especially any member of the strong majority, has to always play the offended card when ever a piece of fiction dares to imply that not every and each member of their group has always been 100% certified saint.

Many idiots yell that it's a "blanat attempt at distorting history", yet they themselves are the only ones stupid enough to concider a piece of fiction as an attempted history lesson. It's a story, a drama, and a brilliant one at that. Now, if it happens to get some historical things corret, all the better. But why should we expect it to be completely loyal to it's time when we don't even expect that from the movies based on modern times?


And to torquemama2002... what is your problem? Why would you assume the priest knows anything any better than anybody else? The DaVinci Code, which I don't even care for, bu the way, is not "full of flat out lies" but full of, yes, storytelling and fiction. I think your attitude speaks for itself.

And for the guy a little more above me, the christians can pray in school all they want. The thing they can't do, though, is to force other people to do that as well. Just a little correction.

reply

TDeMona, STFU.

The New York Rangers suck. And Sidney Crosby is a cry baby!

reply

Torquemama2002, make a stupid acronym here.

reply

I thought the movie made everybody an *beep* except the main character. So I don't really see what reason anybody has to get offended...
You should probably watch it again. It completely demonized the Christians of the time.


...except that we live in the world where everybody, especially any member of the strong majority, has to always play the offended card when ever a piece of fiction dares to imply that not every and each member of their group has always been 100% certified saint.
First of all, Christians are not a strong majority in the entertainment industry. Second, Christians and historians aren't offended by this movie because the Christians in it are portrayed 98% saintly. They're offended because the movie claims that Christianity plunged Western Civilization into the Dark Ages which is complete crap.

Many idiots yell that it's a "blanat attempt at distorting history", yet they themselves are the only ones stupid enough to concider a piece of fiction as an attempted history lesson.
Unfortunately, this is false. Most people believe way too much of what they see in period pieces especially when recurring themes and stereotypes are used over and over again from film to film. All you have to do is read the reviews and message boards here on imdb to see that this is the case.

It's a story, a drama, and a brilliant one at that. Now, if it happens to get some historical things corret, all the better.
Well, it didn't. And your standards may be completely low when it comes to getting the history of Christianity right but it's probably because you don't have an appreciation of history or the impact that film and television have on people's perceptions of the past. People's understanding of the past is important.

The DaVinci Code, which I don't even care for, bu the way, is not "full of flat out lies" but full of, yes, storytelling and fiction. I think your attitude speaks for itself.
The problem is that Dan Brown, in his book, said that it was full of facts and the film does nothing to counter this.

reply

Felixthecat already answered your drivel more than adequately, but since you answered to me point to point, I desire to do the same.

You should probably watch it again. It completely demonized the Christians of the time.

Which in what way implies anything about some other christians not shown, or christians of some other time?

First of all, Christians are not a strong majority in the entertainment industry.

Yes, it must obviously all be the ZOG machine's fault.

They're offended because the movie claims that Christianity plunged Western Civilization into the Dark Ages which is complete crap.

Except that that's exactly what happened, veryfiably so. I'm sorry for your brain wash, and you are completely free to have your beliefs. But please don't rewrite history. Let's rather have clearly fictitious stories do that.

Unfortunately, this is false. Most people believe way too much of what they see in period pieces especially when recurring themes and stereotypes are used over and over again from film to film. All you have to do is read the reviews and message boards here on imdb to see that this is the case.

Well, that's on them then, isn't it? Stupid is what stupid does.

Well, it didn't.

And nobody should give a rat's purple behind because that's not what it was trying to do.

And your standards may be completely low when it comes to getting the history of Christianity right but it's probably because you don't have an appreciation of history...

More than you, obviously.

...or the impact that film and television have on people's perceptions of the past. People's understanding of the past is important.

Oh yes, let's make the entertainment industry into your very own propaganda machine and let's dumb everything down for the numbnuts to get it. As if there is some shortage of pro-christian pro-faith white wash crap out there.

Why don't you - yes, you - get a history book instead? Like, once, instead of watching a movie, you could find out what actually happened, instead?

The problem is that Dan Brown, in his book, said that it was full of facts and the film does nothing to counter this.

I don't care; if that's true then he is obviously a moron. Why is this relevant, on the other hand, I have no effin clue.

By the way, how would you like to have the movie to "counter" that? Like, with a big text on the bottom of the screen saying "THIS IS MERELY FICTION". Does Harry Potter films need that too? "NO WITCHES ACTUALLY EXIST. WITCHCRAFT IS FICTION".

How about, just, no?

reply

Except that that's exactly what happened, veryfiably so.


Really? Can you name a single modern historian of Late Antiquity who makes this claim? Just one. And if Christianity plunged western Europe into a "Dark Age", why was the movie set in Egypt? If Christianity caused the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, why was the movie set in the Eastern Roman Empire which, despite being just as Christian as the WRE, didn't collapse for another 1000 years?

But please don't rewrite history. Let's rather have clearly fictitious stories do that.


The irony of you writing that on the discussion board of a movie that rewrites history is staggering.

http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/2010/05/hypatia-and-agora-redux.htm l

reply

Really? Can you name a single modern historian of Late Antiquity who makes this claim? Just one. And if Christianity plunged western Europe into a "Dark Age", why was the movie set in Egypt? If Christianity caused the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, why was the movie set in the Eastern Roman Empire which, despite being just as Christian as the WRE, didn't collapse for another 1000 years?

Okay. I'm not going to use arguments of authority on this one, sorry. And I didn't mean it was simply christians are evil and destroyed progress on purpose or anything, not everything is quite that black and white. But it's very much in the interests of any religion to keep people dependant of them - thusly not very bright when it comes to actual explanations to stuff. That's why science was so down throtten during the Dark Times, the church simply would not have let it thrive until the renessance when the new winds started to blew ideologically in general.

As to the question of Egypt; well, that's where the story takes place. And althoug the movie is very lax when it comes to historical accuracy, what would have been the point to stage it somewhere else?

The irony of you writing that on the discussion board of a movie that rewrites history is staggering.

The pleasure of your quote mining and leaving the explanation given to the sentences out purposefully is staggering.

reply

I'm not going to use arguments of authority on this one, sorry.


Given that no modern historian of the period would agree with your claim that that Christianity plunged Western Civilization into the Dark Ages, there is zero danger of you using any argument from authority on this point. You also claimed that this was "veryfiably so". Okay - so where is your verification? And why is no modern historian aware of it?

That's why science was so down throtten during the Dark Times, the church simply would not have let it thrive until the renessance


More complete garbage. If the Church kept science so "down throtten" (I'll assume you were trying for "down trodden" there), why do we find advances in physics, optics, dynamics, astronomy, biology, anatomy and a lot more in medieval universities? Why do we have the extensive scientific work by such medieval scientists as Jean Buridan de Bethune, Nicole d'Oresme, Albrecht of Saxony, Albertus Magnus, Robert Grosseteste, Thomas Bradwardine, Theodoric of Fribourg, Roger Bacon, Thierry of Chartres, Gerbert of Aurillac, William of Conches, John Philoponus, John Peckham, Duns Scotus, Thomas Bradwardine, Walter Burley, William Heytesbury, Richard Swineshead, John Dumbleton and Nicholas of Cusa, all of whom were churchmen? Did they not get the memo abou how the Church was meant to be keeping science "down throtten "?

You don't seem to have much a grasp of the history here either.

what would have been the point to stage it somewhere else?


If it's supposedly depicting some neo-Gibbonian nonsense about how the Church caused the fall of the Western Roman Empire, then there would be quite a bit of point setting it in the Western Roman Empire. That should be another indicator to you that the "history" in this silly movie is garbage.

http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/2010/05/hypatia-and-agora-redux.htm l

reply

You should probably watch it again. It completely demonized the Christians of the time.

Which in what way implies anything about some other christians not shown, or christians of some other time?
You need to follow the conversation more closely. I was responding to a post that claimed the film portrayed pagans just as bad as Christians and a cursory view of the film shows this isn't true.

First of all, Christians are not a strong majority in the entertainment industry.

Yes, it must obviously all be the ZOG machine's fault.
I'm not sure what you're referring to by saying, "ZOG machine" but the point is that Christians and Christianity are routinely attacked in modern films and the counter-argument that this can't be true because Christianity is the majority religion in the Western world means jack.

Unfortunately, this is false. Most people believe way too much of what they see in period pieces especially when recurring themes and stereotypes are used over and over again from film to film. All you have to do is read the reviews and message boards here on imdb to see that this is the case.

Well, that's on them then, isn't it? Stupid is what stupid does.
Since you're the one who believes the claims of this film, where does that put you? Unfortunately, in a democratic Western world, stupid people have a lot of clout in the way they vote and think.

Well, it didn't.

And nobody should give a rat's purple behind because that's not what it was trying to do.
You obviously haven't come across any of the interviews with the director who claimed it was historically accurate.

Oh yes, let's make the entertainment industry into your very own propaganda machine and let's dumb everything down for the numbnuts to get it. As if there is some shortage of pro-christian pro-faith white wash crap out there.
You don't have a clue, do you? A propaganda machine is exactly what many filmmakers use the entertainment industry for! This is what people like me are against. And if one day the industry is overrun by Christians who use it to distort history, I would fight against that as well.

By the way, how would you like to have the movie to "counter" that? Like, with a big text on the bottom of the screen saying "THIS IS MERELY FICTION".
Here's a novel concept for ya: How about a film that does it's research and delves into a subject that's interesting and actually have some plausibility? But I forgot, you enjoy the "dumbed-down" stuff.

reply

You need to follow the conversation more closely. I was responding to a post that claimed the film portrayed pagans just as bad as Christians and a cursory view of the film shows this isn't true.

Oh. Okay. My bad.

I'm not sure what you're referring to by saying, "ZOG machine" but the point is that Christians and Christianity are routinely attacked in modern films and the counter-argument that this can't be true because Christianity is the majority religion in the Western world means jack.

Oh you poor down throtten major majority of like 80 % of the population of the western world! Surely the evil jews will destroy everything you have. Seriously.

And thankfully no atheists or pagans are never, ever portrayed in any kind of negative light. Thankfully there are no blockbusters of Nicholas Cage beign a valiant crusader fighting against some evil witches somewhere who want to eat people's harts of and snooty atheist teachers in films that have Kevin are-you-really-this-poor Sorbo in them.

You don't need to watch anything you don't like. Neither do I. And I try not to, even though I sometimes want to give a chance to things. But is your faith really so shallow that a movie that clearly is not aimed at you can shatter it to billion bits?

Since you're the one who believes the claims of this film

When have I said this, exactly?

Unfortunately, in a democratic Western world, stupid people have a lot of clout in the way they vote and think.

That is true. Unfortunately I don't think making movies only about your version of history will solve this problem.

You obviously haven't come across any of the interviews with the director who claimed it was historically accurate.

No, I haven't. I took it as a drama. I don't care if the director wanted to change world we live in by effecting to the inner child of Taliban terrorists through this movie; to me it doesn't really make much difference.

You don't have a clue, do you? A propaganda machine is exactly what many filmmakers use the entertainment industry for! This is what people like me are against.

Yes, well. How would you stop this, exactly? Isn't that what art is for: expressing the wants and opinions of it's makers (amongs other things, ofcourse)? Would you really want to change art from beign a way of expressing one self to a clean way of dumping information about scholary subjects?

And if one day the industry is overrun by Christians who use it to distort history, I would fight against that as well.

This is commendable since atleast you aren't a hypocrite. As am I neither: I don't want to take the christians their ability to do what they want away either. There is enough film makers to speak to both of us, dude.

Here's a novel concept for ya: How about a film that does it's research and delves into a subject that's interesting and actually have some plausibility? But I forgot, you enjoy the "dumbed-down" stuff.

Or how about, and this is even more novel idea, a film does as is best for the story it tries to tell? In a story driven media that is certainly a bold thing to advocate.

Once again, if you want facts, read a book. You won't find them here... and neither you should.

reply

Oh you poor down throtten major majority of like 80 % of the population of the western world! Surely the evil jews will destroy everything you have. Seriously.
First off, I'm an agnostic. I don't follow any religion, let alone Christianity. I wouldn't be much of a champion of rationality if I did since historical critics have far superior interpretations of the Bible than theologians do.

My ultimate aim for society is education over ignorance and my problem with films like Agora is that fighting religious ignorance with historical ignorance is a fools game.

Also, Christians (in the Western World) might not be subject to physical, economic or social persecution at the moment but we have no way of predicting the political climate a century from now and if society has been ingrained with the idea that Christians are at the root of all the worlds problems thanks to a steady stream of television and movie propaganda, that could change rapidly.

Agora is pure, alarmist bigotry.

And thankfully no atheists or pagans are never, ever portrayed in any kind of negative light.
Two wrongs don't make a right and the ratio of negative content against Christians over that against other groups is so high, it practically makes any negative portrayal of non-Christian groups mute. At any rate, conservatives and liberals are already destroying Western Civilization through fear-mongering, we don't need an ignorant war between Christians and non-Christians on top of that.

That is true. Unfortunately I don't think making movies only about your version of history will solve this problem.
Since most people get their ideas about the past from art rather than academia, a few, well researched, (and well executed) historical dramas could indeed solve many problems. It could pave the way for higher standards in historical drama and spark new interests in historical studies.

No, I haven't. I took it as a drama. I don't care if the director wanted to change world we live in by effecting to the inner child of Taliban terrorists through this movie; to me it doesn't really make much difference.
It does make a difference though. Anyone watching the film can tell that it is a historical drama and meant to be taken as factual. Large numbers of people watching the film will not have the knowledge to tell fact from fiction and most of them can't imagine filmmakers going to so much trouble to fudge history for a political agenda.

You don't have a clue, do you? A propaganda machine is exactly what many filmmakers use the entertainment industry for! This is what people like me are against.

Yes, well. How would you stop this, exactly?
Attack the film on boards like this one. Educate as many people as possible. Make our own movies.

Isn't that what art is for: expressing the wants and opinions of it's makers (amongs other things, ofcourse)? Would you really want to change art from beign a way of expressing one self to a clean way of dumping information about scholary subjects?
That's what films like Agora are! It isn't the expression of the way an artist sees the world, it's a film that purports to portray the way history played out. If we lived in a world that demanded excellence in learning and was obsessed with understanding the past, historically distorted films like Agora wouldn't make much impact...but we don't live in that world.

Or how about, and this is even more novel idea, a film does as is best for the story it tries to tell? In a story driven media that is certainly a bold thing to advocate.
If a "message" story is one which has no basis in fact, the story shouldn't be told. Pure and simple. Find another one.

reply

For the same reasons as Jews and Muslims.

reply

The truth hurts. As a Christian I used to get defensive when people criticized Christianity, God, and even the Catholic church. Now I understand that much of the criticism of Christianity in history is truthful. Why get angry over something you had nothing to do with? Is it because you're embarrassed? I think Christians just don't want to be associated with Christianity of the past, but no one is making the association. Just asking that you acknowledge reality. So please all f you defensive Christians, stop denying history already. Many Christians just have such a thin skin because most people in western society tend to be Christian. Most people are too thin skinned for their own good. Whatever happened to names will never hurt me or I'm rubber and you're glue? Suck it up! I think a lot of this comes from an inability to defend yourself with an informed and witty response. People typically stop learning after they graduate high school or college and most never go beyond the basic required education. None of which includes debate!

I find it silly that anyone would claim that "it portrays Christians in a bad light!" They murdered a human being for no reason, why should they be portrayed in a good light? Please give me one reason why they deserve to be portrayed in a good light because I can't think of one. There's also the fact that they vandalized buildings, statues, and the fact that paganism became outlawed by public demand. So Christians started oppressing people at this time, effectively creating the tension that existed and creating their own mess that led to the downfall of society. Masses of people are very fickle, give them something to stand by and root for and they will die and kill for it. The same was true when the Sophists were exiled and put to death 700 years earlier.

Why would anyone think of Christians in a good light considering the way they acted at that point in history? It was a sick and viscous time to live in and Hypatia was an unfortunate innocent bystander and victim.

Why are people so completely stupid? It's not rocket science to understand that Christians were violent and power hungry at that particular time in history.

This film is fairly accurate from what I've read about concerning Hypatia. I mean a few things were different, such as some of her scholarly knowledge and studies. Also her death scene was highly played down, from what I've read it was horrific beyond belief. But a lot of it is just stuff we'll never truly know about her no matter what we dig up in the near future. We couldn't have known what Hypatia understood about the world at that point. We also just can't understand what she was thinking, what she believed. I don't believe the film ever goes beyond her philosophical and rational understanding of the world. It doesn't imply that she was an atheist by any means, just that she saw the world as a rational person. Also, why couldn't she be an atheist? (I'm not saying she was just that I don't see any reason why she theoretically couldn't have been.) The concept of atheism certainly existed at that time, I don't understand this argument.

reply

This film is fairly accurate from what I've read about concerning Hypatia.


No, actually, it isn't. You also keep referring to the people who murdered her as Christians when their religion was actually totally irrelevant.

http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/2010/05/hypatia-and-agora-redux.htm l

reply

[deleted]

How anyone can care how "their" religion is portrayed in a movie that takes place 1600 years ago is beyond me. Grow up, people. I bet you all the every single religion was extremely nasty back in the days and still is. I wish people could use common sense, but unfortunately religion and sense, or logical thinking, very seldomly go hand in hand.

reply

How anyone can care how "their" religion is portrayed in a movie that takes place 1600 years ago is beyond me. Grow up, people. I bet you all the every single religion was extremely nasty back in the days and still is. I wish people could use common sense, but unfortunately religion and sense, or logical thinking, very seldomly go hand in hand.

Exactly, people are just too childish for their own good. They want to self identify with Christianity and all it represents. But this is a bad idea because Christianity has a lot of ugliness in its own history. I think it's a sign of a weak identity to self identify through these types of things.

reply

[deleted]

Why did you post this again?

http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com.au/2010/05/hypatia-and-agora-redux. html

reply

Why did you delete it? Hard to make your case unless you destroy some evidence?

reply

Why did you delete it?


Would you get it through your skull that mere IMDB users can't delete other users posts. I couldn't delete your posts even if I wanted to (which I don't). I have no idea why your posts keep getting deleted. Did you take it up with the Admins? And did it occur to you that this repeated lie that I'm deleting your posts might be part of the problem?

http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com.au/2010/05/hypatia-and-agora-redux. html

reply

Strangely enough, the posts that are getting deleted are not ones with accusations of you, but with answers to your arguments. Beat you in a debate and the whole thread starts filling up with deleted posts.

Here's another poster who's posts were being deleted. I guess he was slandering you too, huh? And I guess it makes sense, for IMDB admins, to just keep deleting slanderous posts by the same user, and do nothing else about it, right?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1186830/board/thread/187683413?d=188579502 #188579502

reply

For the benefit of the people following this magic debate, I've re-posted my post for the 3rd time, here:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1186830/board/thread/180429699?d=224186176 #224186176

reply

Not really a christian myself, but... let's be objective here for a while. If a movie was made about atheists killing christians in a murderous frenzy during the French revolution (yes, that happened), basically portraying free-thinking rationalist-atheists as evil and christians as victims - would free-thinkers give the movie a lot of kudos? I can guarantee you that *I* personally wouldn't consider that movie to be worth anything at all. And neither should anyone expect the christians to respect this mockery film. Even though the film was partially (but only partially) accurate, it was clearly made with one purpose in mind: to show people that christians are not really humans. They are orcs from Lord of the Rings.

Usually I myself enjoy skeptical movies (I *LOVE* Monty Python's Life of Brian, for example). But Agora was just ridicilious. I greatly dislike all this "we are good and those other people are evil" -sort of c**p in movies. This attitude is mostly based on ignorant refusal to accept that phenomenoms have reasons behind them. The reason why Christiansity was so popular was NOT because people enjoyed acting like orcs from the Lord of the Rings. Wether you are a christian or not, you should be able to comprehend that reality is FAR more complex than that.

reply

Thank you!
Not that I know if you will ever read this, but thank you!
Yeah, it is only proper to acknowledge that some Christians did some awful things in the past.
And it's true that a few Pagans also were given a negative portrayal in the first half of this movie.
But in the end, it was over the top with its condemnation of (almost) all Christians.

reply