Someone offered this insight about the story:
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Match Point
Wuchakk — 11 years ago(March 21, 2015 06:33 PM)
Someone offered this insight about the story:
Tennis is a game designed by a creator with a set of rules. You win the point if the ball goes forward or lose the point if the ball falls back.
The ring doesn't bounce forward across the other side and into the water and you immediately think Chris has lost the point and will be found out. But since life itself has no designer, and there are no true rules, it turns out that it was actually good luck for Chris because the ring was found by a bum with a history of petty theft and therefore he, not Chris, was thought to be the murderer.
While this is an intriguing insight and legitimate interpretation, it doesn't rule out a Creator or the fact that there are intrinsic moral laws in the physical universe. For instance, if there are no such laws why does Chris almost have a nervous breakdown after committing the murders? After all, if no such laws exist then it's impossible to break them and meaningless to be upset about it if you do. Why does he see non-literal ghosts of the victims? Obviously he broke an ironclad moral law and was now experiencing the guilt thereof. Yes, luck worked in his favor at the end of the story and this is in line with the insight of one of the wisest persons who ever lived: "I have seen something else under the sun: The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all" (Ecclesiastes 9:11).
Yet, this doesn't preclude the existence of God or that there will be a judgment day in the Supreme Court of the universe. As Christ said, "There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs."
Simply put, the idea that evil people "get away" with their crimes is an illusion. The best they can do is get away with them
temporarily
.
My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/ -
Quicksilver1900 — 11 years ago(March 22, 2015 05:03 AM)
So sorry to burst your protective bubble, but no, no, and no. Chris ' guilt can be explained simply as a result of the conditioning of his Western, Irish-Catholic upbringing, which condemns murder. No supernatural force is required. Had he been raised in an amoral society, he would not have experienced any guilt.
There is no evidence whatever that the bible was written by anyone other than man, the only creature on this planet known to have writing and literature. And the bible is so full of inconsistencies, contradictions, and untruths, as well as promoting tyranny, discrimination and slavery, that no truly moral person would ever follow its' precepts, let alone accept its' predictions.
And there is no evidence that anyone who has escaped punishment for their crimes while they were alive will be facing any kind of judgement or punishment after their death. No one has ever come back with any credible proof. -
Wuchakk — 11 years ago(March 22, 2015 11:27 AM)
And the bible is so full of inconsistencies, contradictions, and untruths, as well as promoting tyranny, discrimination and slavery, that no truly moral person would ever follow its' precepts, let alone accept its' predictions.
You just proved your ignorance of the Bible, not to mention your ignorance in general.
I repeat: The idea that evil people "get away" with their crimes is an illusion. The best they can do is get away with them temporarily. Everything's being "video-taped." Deny it all you want; what's that to me?
My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/ -
Wuchakk — 11 years ago(March 24, 2015 01:19 AM)
Insulting my intelligence or knowledge does not exactly enhance your credibility; if anything, it achieves the opposite effect.
It was the natural response to your misrepresentation of what the bible says on various topics. While it's expected that people will diametrically disagree on forums like this, intentional misrepresentation of important topics, like what the bible actually teaches on those issues you cited, is grounds for a such a response.
It's possible, however, that you really do believe the bible promotes those things you speak of, so please allow me to respectfully respond:
the bible is so full of inconsistencies, contradictions
Only to someone investigating it superficially. There are obvious hermeneutical rules, such as "Scripture interprets Scripture," meaning that the a passage is interpreted in light of its immediate context and also the greater context of the entire bible. One verse might superficially address a topic while another offers more detail. Needless to say, the more overt and detailed passages expand our understanding of the more sketchy and ambiguous ones.
and untruths
You want to hear some truly blatant un-truths? Attend the typical American university or listen to the lamestream media. Not that everything they say or teach is bad, of course.
promoting tyranny
There's a difference between righteous Lordship (or kingship) and oppressive tyranny. For instance, Jesus Christ is called the "King of kings and Lord of lords" and, according to the bible, will function in this capacity eternally in the "new heavens and new earth," which is the eternal age-to-come.
Would you like to hear about Jesus' abusive, domineering governmental proclivities? Listen to what he says:
"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and
I will give you rest
. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for
I am gentle and humble in heart
, and
you will find rest for your souls
. For
my yoke is easy and my burden is light
.
As for the Israelite monarchy in the Old Testament, including the divided kingdom, God originally wanted the Israelites to be a theocracy, but they cried out for a king and so the LORD allowed it. The problem with monarchies in a morally fallen world is that, sooner or later, you'll wind up with a corrupt king or queen who will mislead the people, which is precisely what happened with both Ephraim (Northern Israel) and Judah (Southern Israel).
discrimination
I'll just quote from the bible:
There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.
For God does not show favoritism
.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
and slavery
As you can see above, there's neither slave nor free person "in Christ Jesus."
This explains why Paul encouraged his friend and fellow Christian, Philemon, to set free his runaway slave, Onesimus, when Paul sent Onesimus back to Philemon. It's not overtly stated, but obviously insinuated, e.g. "knowing that you will do even more than I ask" (Philemon 1:14-21).
The institution of slavery in the Roman world of the first century was a widespread, ironclad fact of life, and the New Testament's instructions to slaves and owners must be viewed in that historical light.
Nevertheless, Paul's instructions to slaves and masters in Ephesians 6:5-9 were utterly revolutionary at the time. The focus wasn't to challenge the morality of the system but rather to transform people
within
the system
from within
(that is, in their sprits and hearts). Freedom always starts within and then proceeds without; and I don't mean just freedom from conventional slavery. Trying to change people from the outside in, by contrast, doesn't work because it's merely a garnishment.
That said, Paul plainly instructed slaves:
"Were you a slave when you were called (to the Lord)? Dont let it trouble you although
if you can gain your freedom, do so
"
(1 Corinthians 7:21).
As you can see, the bible actually
doesn't
support slavery.
Add to this the fact that the great abolitionists of the 18th and 19th centuries were devout Christians, e.g. William Wilberforce and William Lloyd Garrison.
As for the voluntary servants permitted amongst Hebrews according to the Torah, this wasn't slavery as you understand it. Individuals could sell their services for up to six years to repay debts or what have you; on the seventh year they were released, unless they loved their "masters" and wanted to stay (see Exodus 21:2-6). As such, Hebrew "slaves" were actually hired hands and only became lifelong servants based on the desire of the servant (and the master).
As you can see, the topic as depicted in the bible isn't as simplistic as you suggest. In fact,
Christianity's all about freedom from slavery
and far more than just the conventional kind, as this verse shows:
It -
Quicksilver1900 — 11 years ago(March 24, 2015 01:50 AM)
I read through your response, and saw that you haven't provided any proof or justification for your beliefs, apart from your beliefs, ie, 'I believe what the bible says because the bible tells me it's true'. I doubt you'll read any of these nearly 25,000 entries on biblical inconsistencies and contradictions, but in case you dohere you go:
https://www.google.it/search?num=50&client=firefox-a&hs=F5g&am p;rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=fflb&q=bible+inconsis tencies+bible+contradictions&revid=400975819&sa=X&ei=ESQRV ei9JoSHO8zygPAG&ved=0COYCENUCKAI&biw=1120&bih=510
I particularly recommend this one
http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com/ -
manofsteel4455 — 10 years ago(May 12, 2015 10:40 AM)
The whole"concept" of God and everything associated with him just sounds awfully way too big to just be made up. Especially when you consider the time period religion first started, when human intelligence still hadn't evolved much.
-
Mehki_Girl — 10 years ago(May 17, 2015 07:49 PM)
His being nervous is no proof of a diety, it's only proof he's afraid of getting caught and losing his freedom.
http://www.auplod.com/u/dalpuo430da.png -
Wuchakk — 10 years ago(May 17, 2015 10:59 PM)
It's a good point and true to a degree, but as noted Chris almost has a nervous breakdown after the murders and then sees imaginary ghosts of the victims, even if it's in his dreams. It points to the intrinsic guilt of breaking a universal moral law and not merely fear of getting caught, particularly since there was no reason for him to think that the murders would be traced to him at this point.
My 150 (or so) favorite movies:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070122364/ -
Franco_Zed — 10 years ago(September 09, 2015 12:51 AM)
". there are intrinsic moral laws in the physical universe. For instance, if there are no such laws why does Chris almost have a nervous breakdown after committing the murders?"
Chris could simply have a conscience, that is a trait that he has inherited, because it was advantageous to his ancestors to have a conscience.
Every single person on the face of the Earth is unique.
except for you. -
SCsurfguy — 9 years ago(August 07, 2016 10:42 PM)
Unfortunately there are a lot of human beings who will always think they are so smart that they have to be able to explain everything, and find reason for everything. And if they can't, it must not be true. This is because they're thinking with finite, human minds.
Belief in God, the life of Jesus and the Bible itself rely heavily on faith. There are so many things that can't be explained with a human mind, and that's what separates God from everyone else. His ways are not our ways. And it's easy to disregard or question Him because we don't agree with His ways. Ways that test our faith, but will be explained someday. For those who believe.
As for those who find a lack of truth in the Bible, contradictions and inconsistencies, it's because they don't understand it. And they've never taken the time to study it or understand it. They've too heavily disregarded it to give it the time it needs to be understood. They take quotes, events and concepts out of context and try to suggest that God justifies it. No He doesn't. The Bible is full of human fallibility. The events and the misdeeds are brought on by humankind. Not God. God gave us a chance to make the right decision and we didn't.
They take things out of context, which shows any lacking of understanding of the doctrine in historical context, or anything else..and then profess it as inconsistencies.
