Search
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Ad Astra (2019) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
Impressive visuals, but rather disappointing as an overall package.
Like father, like son?
I really love sci-fi films with high ambitions. “Psychological” sci-fi like “Solaris” for example. And “Arrival” topped my movie list for 2016. In similar vein, “Ad Astra” is also a movie concerning attempted contact with alien life. So I had high hopes for it. But would this Sci-fi epic ultimately challenge my brain again, or end up in the “Crystal Skull” sin bin with a dodgy alien meeting?
The Plot
Set a few years into the future, Roy McBride (Brad Pitt) is the son of a legend. H. Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones) was a space exploration pioneer. His picture hangs in the NASA hall of fame next to Buzz Aldrin’s. McBride senior went missing presumed dead near Neptune during a mission. The mission was to get outside the Sun’s heliosphere to scan for potential alien transmissions from nearby solar systems.
But something went badly wrong, and now the earth (and potentially all human life migrating into the solar system) is at risk from massive electromagnetic bursts arising from Neptune. Is Clifford alive and involved in the emerging crisis? The authorities send Roy on a secret mission to Mars to try to communicate with his father.
Majestic cinematography
Let’s start with a real positive. The cinematography here is first rate. Hoyte Van-Hoytema – well known for “Interstellar“, “Spectre” and “Dunkirk” – knocks this out of the park. In the same manner as “Blade Runner 2049“, many of the frames of this film could be blown up and placed on art gallery walls around the world.
Add to that some cracking film editing from John Axelrad and Lee Haugen, and some beautiful sound design and I predict the movie should feature strongly in the technical awards at the Oscars.
But “science fiction” has the word “science” in it….
I’d like to park my physics brain sometimes when I go to the movies, but I just can’t. So I really need sci-fi films to live up to the science part of their name. There are a number of areas, particularly at the back end of the film, when credibility goes out the window.
I can’t really say more here without giving spoilers, so I will leave them to a “Spoiler section” below the trailer…. don’t read this if you haven’t seen the film!
What IS this movie trying to be?
In my view the film is pretty schizophrenic in nature. This is what confused me about the trailer, jumping from a cerebral sci-fi vibe to moon buggy shoot-outs.
On one hand, its the standard (but always interesting) tale of a child abandoned by a hero-father and his attempts to reconcile what that’s done to his life and relationships. How can he ever square that circle without contacting his dad? As the film’s tag-line goes “The answers we seek are just outside our reach”.
On the other there are episodes of action that would fit happily into an action scene from Star Trek.
The two elements never really gel, leading to the feeling of the film having been written as a set of disconnected pages and the writers then saying “Hey, Jimmy, once you’ve finished making us the tea, could you just write a few lines to join those pages up into a shooting script?”. Then later, “What do you mean Jimmy you used BOTH piles of paper?!”.
The greatest sin of all
Unfortunately, the film commits a cardinal sin in my book. Those of you who follow my blog regularly might know what I’m going to say….
Voiceovers! I BLOODY HATE THEM!! It’s at the very extreme of what the great Mark Kermode calls “show don’t tell”.
Here, we don’t just have a little Brad Pitt set-up intro and he then shuts up. He just drones on and on and on with his inner thoughts. At least Matt Damon in “The Martian” got away with it by cleverly filming his video blog. And it’s not as if there isn’t a prime opportunity to use that device here! He is constantly having to talk to a computer to do his regular psychological tests! But that option is not picked up.
BIG BLACK MARK!
But the film has its moments
Bubbling under all of this are some stand-out moments where, for me, the film soared. One of them (ultimately setting me up for as much of a disappointing fall as some of the characters!) is the stunning opening shots aboard the “Sky Antenna” structure. Impressive and exciting, with falling bits of metal playing Russian Roulette with Roy’s iife.
Another strength for me is Brad Pitt. I’ve seen wildly differing views on this, but for me its a quiet but strong acting performance. There are many scenes when he has no lines, his inner (and our outer) voice gives it a miss, and he acts the socks off his peers. What with “Once Upon A Time… In Hollywood” its been a really good year for Pitt. I suspect “Hollywood” might be the one though that gets him his fourth acting Oscar nomination.
For a 2019 film, it’s actually a very male-heavy film, made more so by Pitt’s love-interest (Liv Tyler) being given virtually nothing to do other that look a bit sulky from a distance. I’m not even sure she gets a single line in the whole film! (“Miss Tyler – please sign for your script”. “But, there’s nothing in the envelope?”. “Quite Miss Tyler, Quite”).
The only decent female role goes to Ruth Negga as the Mars colony leader. Even then, she only has limited screen time and although having the title “Mars CEO” really doesn’t seem to have much power.
Elsewhere, its great to see both Tommy Lee Jones and Donald Sutherland back on the big screen again.
Final Thoughts
As any veteran RAF person will know, “Ad Astra” is Latin for “To the stars”. In space terms this is less “to the stars” and more “just beyond your front door”.
James Gray‘s film undoubtedly has high ambitions but, through its spasmodic script, never really gets there. It has the beauty of “Gravity” but none of the refinement; there’s an essence of “Space Odyssey” in places, but it never goes for the mystical angle; it has the potential to reflect the near-insanity through loneliness of “Silent Running” but never commits fully to that storyline. But if its novelty you’re looking for, it ticks the “floating monkeys in space” box!
I think it’s worth seeing on the big screen just for its visual beauty and Pitt’s performance. And as a major block-buster sci-fi film I enjoyed it to a degree. But for me it had just so many irritations that it failed to live up to my high expectations. A great shame and a frustrating disappointment.
But at least it’s great news for Richard Branson and Virgin Atlantic shareholders. They can be assured that the future is bright for their “long distance” flights in the future!
I really love sci-fi films with high ambitions. “Psychological” sci-fi like “Solaris” for example. And “Arrival” topped my movie list for 2016. In similar vein, “Ad Astra” is also a movie concerning attempted contact with alien life. So I had high hopes for it. But would this Sci-fi epic ultimately challenge my brain again, or end up in the “Crystal Skull” sin bin with a dodgy alien meeting?
The Plot
Set a few years into the future, Roy McBride (Brad Pitt) is the son of a legend. H. Clifford McBride (Tommy Lee Jones) was a space exploration pioneer. His picture hangs in the NASA hall of fame next to Buzz Aldrin’s. McBride senior went missing presumed dead near Neptune during a mission. The mission was to get outside the Sun’s heliosphere to scan for potential alien transmissions from nearby solar systems.
But something went badly wrong, and now the earth (and potentially all human life migrating into the solar system) is at risk from massive electromagnetic bursts arising from Neptune. Is Clifford alive and involved in the emerging crisis? The authorities send Roy on a secret mission to Mars to try to communicate with his father.
Majestic cinematography
Let’s start with a real positive. The cinematography here is first rate. Hoyte Van-Hoytema – well known for “Interstellar“, “Spectre” and “Dunkirk” – knocks this out of the park. In the same manner as “Blade Runner 2049“, many of the frames of this film could be blown up and placed on art gallery walls around the world.
Add to that some cracking film editing from John Axelrad and Lee Haugen, and some beautiful sound design and I predict the movie should feature strongly in the technical awards at the Oscars.
But “science fiction” has the word “science” in it….
I’d like to park my physics brain sometimes when I go to the movies, but I just can’t. So I really need sci-fi films to live up to the science part of their name. There are a number of areas, particularly at the back end of the film, when credibility goes out the window.
I can’t really say more here without giving spoilers, so I will leave them to a “Spoiler section” below the trailer…. don’t read this if you haven’t seen the film!
What IS this movie trying to be?
In my view the film is pretty schizophrenic in nature. This is what confused me about the trailer, jumping from a cerebral sci-fi vibe to moon buggy shoot-outs.
On one hand, its the standard (but always interesting) tale of a child abandoned by a hero-father and his attempts to reconcile what that’s done to his life and relationships. How can he ever square that circle without contacting his dad? As the film’s tag-line goes “The answers we seek are just outside our reach”.
On the other there are episodes of action that would fit happily into an action scene from Star Trek.
The two elements never really gel, leading to the feeling of the film having been written as a set of disconnected pages and the writers then saying “Hey, Jimmy, once you’ve finished making us the tea, could you just write a few lines to join those pages up into a shooting script?”. Then later, “What do you mean Jimmy you used BOTH piles of paper?!”.
The greatest sin of all
Unfortunately, the film commits a cardinal sin in my book. Those of you who follow my blog regularly might know what I’m going to say….
Voiceovers! I BLOODY HATE THEM!! It’s at the very extreme of what the great Mark Kermode calls “show don’t tell”.
Here, we don’t just have a little Brad Pitt set-up intro and he then shuts up. He just drones on and on and on with his inner thoughts. At least Matt Damon in “The Martian” got away with it by cleverly filming his video blog. And it’s not as if there isn’t a prime opportunity to use that device here! He is constantly having to talk to a computer to do his regular psychological tests! But that option is not picked up.
BIG BLACK MARK!
But the film has its moments
Bubbling under all of this are some stand-out moments where, for me, the film soared. One of them (ultimately setting me up for as much of a disappointing fall as some of the characters!) is the stunning opening shots aboard the “Sky Antenna” structure. Impressive and exciting, with falling bits of metal playing Russian Roulette with Roy’s iife.
Another strength for me is Brad Pitt. I’ve seen wildly differing views on this, but for me its a quiet but strong acting performance. There are many scenes when he has no lines, his inner (and our outer) voice gives it a miss, and he acts the socks off his peers. What with “Once Upon A Time… In Hollywood” its been a really good year for Pitt. I suspect “Hollywood” might be the one though that gets him his fourth acting Oscar nomination.
For a 2019 film, it’s actually a very male-heavy film, made more so by Pitt’s love-interest (Liv Tyler) being given virtually nothing to do other that look a bit sulky from a distance. I’m not even sure she gets a single line in the whole film! (“Miss Tyler – please sign for your script”. “But, there’s nothing in the envelope?”. “Quite Miss Tyler, Quite”).
The only decent female role goes to Ruth Negga as the Mars colony leader. Even then, she only has limited screen time and although having the title “Mars CEO” really doesn’t seem to have much power.
Elsewhere, its great to see both Tommy Lee Jones and Donald Sutherland back on the big screen again.
Final Thoughts
As any veteran RAF person will know, “Ad Astra” is Latin for “To the stars”. In space terms this is less “to the stars” and more “just beyond your front door”.
James Gray‘s film undoubtedly has high ambitions but, through its spasmodic script, never really gets there. It has the beauty of “Gravity” but none of the refinement; there’s an essence of “Space Odyssey” in places, but it never goes for the mystical angle; it has the potential to reflect the near-insanity through loneliness of “Silent Running” but never commits fully to that storyline. But if its novelty you’re looking for, it ticks the “floating monkeys in space” box!
I think it’s worth seeing on the big screen just for its visual beauty and Pitt’s performance. And as a major block-buster sci-fi film I enjoyed it to a degree. But for me it had just so many irritations that it failed to live up to my high expectations. A great shame and a frustrating disappointment.
But at least it’s great news for Richard Branson and Virgin Atlantic shareholders. They can be assured that the future is bright for their “long distance” flights in the future!
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Custom Heroes in Tabletop Games
Feb 7, 2022
You know that feeling when you play a game that FEELS familiar, but has really improved on certain aspects? Take, for example, the famed “Yahtzee mechanic” that has been extended and improved upon by so many games. Or the “I Cut, You Choose mechanic” that has shown up in several titles with slight variations to improve it? Well such was my feeling when cracking open Custom Heroes. I thought to myself, “Man, this feels natural in my hands, but it’s better.” I know I left myself open for tons of jokes here, but this is a PG(ish) forum, so keep it classy, everyone.
Custom Heroes is a fantasy/sci-fi-themed, customization, ladder-climbing, trick-taking card game for two to six players. In it players are using their hand of cards to win tricks (a la Tichu). The twist is that each card is able to be upgraded by using various Advancements that are added directly into the same sleeve as the base card. The winner of the game is they who amass 10 or more points and win a subsequent hand.
Before the first game after unboxing, all Character Cards will need to be sleeved. These Character Cards are numbered from 1-10 and come in six sets (one set of 10 cards for each player, at max player count). To setup the game, each player chooses a Player Screen to hide their resources and provide the scoring table. Shuffle the Character cards and deal each player a hand of 10 cards. For this review, I will be using the two-player rules. Players also begin with 1VP Token and 2 Power Tokens, along with an Ascended Form Advancement Card and Kodora Advancement Card. In a two-player game, players begin with three total Advancement Cards, as shown in the photo below. The rest of the VP Tokens and Power Tokens are placed (or thrown, in my case) on the table, and the remainder of the Advancement Cards are shuffled and placed in the bag to be drawn randomly throughout the game. The battle for tricks may now begin!
As with all (most?) trick-taking games, Custom Heroes is played over a series of rounds. However, Custom Heroes is played across three phases: Upkeep, Main, Scoring. During the Upkeep phase, the deck of Character Cards is shuffled and 10 cards are dealt to each player. On each player’s turn during the Main phase, they will decide if they would like to upgrade any card by sleeving Advancement Cards along with the Character Cards. These Advancement Cards are clear plastic and will alter the value of the card, provide special abilities, or provide modifiers to the card’s value. Sleeving new Advancements may be done at any time during the turn, before playing it, but the caveat is that ALL cards are shuffled and dealt to players after every round, so the chances of receiving that same card in future hands diminishes with each additional player at the table!
Once Advancements have been applied, or whilst applying, the players will determine the lead play. A lead could be a single card or several matching cards in a set. The following player will need to play a card, or cards, of the same number, but of higher value. For example, if a single 7 was led, only a single 8, 9, or 10 will beat it. However, if a pair of 5s was led, a pair of 6-10 will beat that lead. Players may pass if they cannot, or choose not to, beat the current trick, and can engage in play on a future trick. Once a player has run out of cards for the hand, or all players have passed. The first player to run out of cards, or the last player to play a card, wins the hand and receives the benefits listed on the scoring table shown below. Again, when a player earns 10 VP and wins a hand, they win!
A few notes about Advancement Cards. The Ascended Form card given to all players at setup will allow the player to win the trick for that round once played. It is essentially a wild insta-win card. That is, unless another player plays an Ascended Form on top of it and wins with the most recent Ascended Form. The Kodora card, however, can be played to the player’s tableau instead of as a card in a trick. When played this way, the player “bets” two VP Tokens that they will win the hand. If they do, they gain an additional two VP Tokens, but lose their bet if they do not finish in 1st Place. All other Advancement Cards may be added to the Character Card sleeve as long as the associated gem icon at the bottom is not already present in the sleeve. As there are four gem slots on Character Cards, each Character may be upgraded four total times.
Components. This one comes with a number of components of different types. The tokens are all small, but not too small, the bag is cool, but obviously the main attractions are the clear plastic cards and sleeves common to the Card Crafting System that AEG produced. I think I first saw this idea of layering plastic cards on top of one another in the Gloom series, though it may have existed even before that. I adore this idea and really fell in love with it when I was big into Mystic Vale, also from John D. Clair and AEG. So components for me get a big ol’ seal of approval. I love ’em.
Similarly, I think the gameplay gets a big seal of approval from me. Like I said, I was big into Mystic Vale for a while, but I think that Cusom Heroes, to me, trumps it in many ways. Though both boxes mention games approximately taking around 45 minutes, I found Mystic Vale to be much longer, mostly due to having to explain and re-explain rules and oddities to players at the table. It feels like Custom Heroes has cut down the complexity of gameplay, especially for newer gamers. I can bring out Custom Heroes and have it taught and played in under an hour – a feat I still haven’t mastered with Mystic Vale.
I think that I also prefer the trick-taking style of Custom Heroes a bit more. My family really enjoys playing Euchre at family reunions and other events, and while Custom Heroes isn’t a Euchre clone at all, the feel is very similar. There is still a led card, and cards that are more valuable to be played atop them in order to win tricks. While there isn’t necessarily any suits in Custom Heroes, the ability to trump an entire hand with an Ascended Form Advancement or other Advancements adds a layer (see what I did there) of strategy and tactics that is just so satisfying. I am a big fan of games that allow players to upgrade their starting resources, or level up their characters, and this one fits right inside a little 60 minute pocket and is relatively easy to teach and play.
All in all, I am so glad I found this one at my FLGS (well, not super local), and there was a big sale going on. I picked it up solely for the Card Crafting System logo and it was a big hit for me. This will completely replace Mystic Vale for me in my collection, and I couldn’t be happier with that. If you are looking for something quick, easy, but full of choices and modifications, this is certainly the game for you. It’s the game for me, and that’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Custom Heroes a mostly-upgraded 5 / 6. Could this reach into my Top 10 someday, or earn a Golden Feather Award? It is entirely possible. We shall see with more and more plays. I am excited to give it many more plays and find out! Are you in?
Custom Heroes is a fantasy/sci-fi-themed, customization, ladder-climbing, trick-taking card game for two to six players. In it players are using their hand of cards to win tricks (a la Tichu). The twist is that each card is able to be upgraded by using various Advancements that are added directly into the same sleeve as the base card. The winner of the game is they who amass 10 or more points and win a subsequent hand.
Before the first game after unboxing, all Character Cards will need to be sleeved. These Character Cards are numbered from 1-10 and come in six sets (one set of 10 cards for each player, at max player count). To setup the game, each player chooses a Player Screen to hide their resources and provide the scoring table. Shuffle the Character cards and deal each player a hand of 10 cards. For this review, I will be using the two-player rules. Players also begin with 1VP Token and 2 Power Tokens, along with an Ascended Form Advancement Card and Kodora Advancement Card. In a two-player game, players begin with three total Advancement Cards, as shown in the photo below. The rest of the VP Tokens and Power Tokens are placed (or thrown, in my case) on the table, and the remainder of the Advancement Cards are shuffled and placed in the bag to be drawn randomly throughout the game. The battle for tricks may now begin!
As with all (most?) trick-taking games, Custom Heroes is played over a series of rounds. However, Custom Heroes is played across three phases: Upkeep, Main, Scoring. During the Upkeep phase, the deck of Character Cards is shuffled and 10 cards are dealt to each player. On each player’s turn during the Main phase, they will decide if they would like to upgrade any card by sleeving Advancement Cards along with the Character Cards. These Advancement Cards are clear plastic and will alter the value of the card, provide special abilities, or provide modifiers to the card’s value. Sleeving new Advancements may be done at any time during the turn, before playing it, but the caveat is that ALL cards are shuffled and dealt to players after every round, so the chances of receiving that same card in future hands diminishes with each additional player at the table!
Once Advancements have been applied, or whilst applying, the players will determine the lead play. A lead could be a single card or several matching cards in a set. The following player will need to play a card, or cards, of the same number, but of higher value. For example, if a single 7 was led, only a single 8, 9, or 10 will beat it. However, if a pair of 5s was led, a pair of 6-10 will beat that lead. Players may pass if they cannot, or choose not to, beat the current trick, and can engage in play on a future trick. Once a player has run out of cards for the hand, or all players have passed. The first player to run out of cards, or the last player to play a card, wins the hand and receives the benefits listed on the scoring table shown below. Again, when a player earns 10 VP and wins a hand, they win!
A few notes about Advancement Cards. The Ascended Form card given to all players at setup will allow the player to win the trick for that round once played. It is essentially a wild insta-win card. That is, unless another player plays an Ascended Form on top of it and wins with the most recent Ascended Form. The Kodora card, however, can be played to the player’s tableau instead of as a card in a trick. When played this way, the player “bets” two VP Tokens that they will win the hand. If they do, they gain an additional two VP Tokens, but lose their bet if they do not finish in 1st Place. All other Advancement Cards may be added to the Character Card sleeve as long as the associated gem icon at the bottom is not already present in the sleeve. As there are four gem slots on Character Cards, each Character may be upgraded four total times.
Components. This one comes with a number of components of different types. The tokens are all small, but not too small, the bag is cool, but obviously the main attractions are the clear plastic cards and sleeves common to the Card Crafting System that AEG produced. I think I first saw this idea of layering plastic cards on top of one another in the Gloom series, though it may have existed even before that. I adore this idea and really fell in love with it when I was big into Mystic Vale, also from John D. Clair and AEG. So components for me get a big ol’ seal of approval. I love ’em.
Similarly, I think the gameplay gets a big seal of approval from me. Like I said, I was big into Mystic Vale for a while, but I think that Cusom Heroes, to me, trumps it in many ways. Though both boxes mention games approximately taking around 45 minutes, I found Mystic Vale to be much longer, mostly due to having to explain and re-explain rules and oddities to players at the table. It feels like Custom Heroes has cut down the complexity of gameplay, especially for newer gamers. I can bring out Custom Heroes and have it taught and played in under an hour – a feat I still haven’t mastered with Mystic Vale.
I think that I also prefer the trick-taking style of Custom Heroes a bit more. My family really enjoys playing Euchre at family reunions and other events, and while Custom Heroes isn’t a Euchre clone at all, the feel is very similar. There is still a led card, and cards that are more valuable to be played atop them in order to win tricks. While there isn’t necessarily any suits in Custom Heroes, the ability to trump an entire hand with an Ascended Form Advancement or other Advancements adds a layer (see what I did there) of strategy and tactics that is just so satisfying. I am a big fan of games that allow players to upgrade their starting resources, or level up their characters, and this one fits right inside a little 60 minute pocket and is relatively easy to teach and play.
All in all, I am so glad I found this one at my FLGS (well, not super local), and there was a big sale going on. I picked it up solely for the Card Crafting System logo and it was a big hit for me. This will completely replace Mystic Vale for me in my collection, and I couldn’t be happier with that. If you are looking for something quick, easy, but full of choices and modifications, this is certainly the game for you. It’s the game for me, and that’s why Purple Phoenix Games gives Custom Heroes a mostly-upgraded 5 / 6. Could this reach into my Top 10 someday, or earn a Golden Feather Award? It is entirely possible. We shall see with more and more plays. I am excited to give it many more plays and find out! Are you in?
Cody Cook (8 KP) rated Writings Of Thomas Paine Volume 4 (1794 1796); The Age Of Reason in Books
Jun 29, 2018
Thomas Paine was a political theorist who was perhaps best known for his support for the American Revolution in his pamphlet Common Sense. In what might be his second best known work, The Age of Reason, Paine argued in favor of deism and against the Christian religion and its conception of God. By deism it is meant the belief in a creator God who does not violate the laws of nature by communicating through revelation or miracles The book was very successful and widely read partly due to the fact that it was written in a style which appealed to a popular audience and often implemented a sarcastic, derisive tone to make its points.
The book seems to have had three major objectives: the support of deism, the ridicule of what Paine found loathsome in Christian theology, and the demonstration of how poor an example the Bible is as a reflection of God.
In a sense, Paine's arguments against Christian theology and scripture were meant to prop up his deistic philosophy. Paine hoped that in demonizing Christianity while giving evidences for God, he would somehow have made the case for deism. But this is not so. If Christianity is false, but God exists nonetheless, we are not left only with deism. There are an infinite number of possibilities for us to examine regarding the nature of God, and far too many left over once we have eliminated the obviously false ones. In favor of deism Paine has only one argument—his dislike of supernatural revelation, which is to say that deism appeals to his culturally derived preferences. In any case, Paine's thinking on the matter seemed to be thus: if supernatural revelation could be shown to be inadequate and the development of complex theology shown to be an error, one could still salvage a belief in God as Creator, but not as an interloper in human affairs who required mediators.
That being said, in his support of deism, Paine makes some arguments to demonstrate the reasonableness in belief in, if not the logical necessity of the existence of, God which could be equally used by Christians.
For instance, just as the apostle Paul argued in his epistle to the Romans that, "what can be known about God is plain to [even pagans], because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20, ESV), so also Paine can say that, "the Creation speaketh an universal language [which points to the existence of God], independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they be."
The key point on which Paine differs from Paul on this issue is in his optimism about man's ability to reason to God without His assisting from the outside. Whereas Paul sees the plainness of God from natural revelation as an argument against the inherent goodness of a species which can read the record of nature and nevertheless rejects its Source's obvious existence, Paine thinks that nature and reason can and do lead us directly to the knowledge of God's existence apart from any gracious overtures or direct revelation.
On the witness of nature, Paine claims, and is quite correct, that, "THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man." What is not plainly clear, however, is that man is free enough from the noetic effects of sin to reach such an obvious conclusion on his own. Indeed, the attempts of mankind to create a religion which represents the truth have invariably landed them at paganism. By paganism I mean a system of belief based, as Yehezkel Kaufmann and John N. Oswalt have shown, on continuity.iv In polytheism, even the supernatural is not really supernatural, but is perhaps in some way above humans while not being altogether distinct from us. What happens to the gods is merely what happens to human beings and the natural world writ large, which is why the gods are, like us, victims of fate, and why pagan fertility rituals have attempted to influence nature by influencing the gods which represent it in accordance with the deeper magic of the eternal universe we all inhabit.
When mankind has looked at nature without the benefit of supernatural revelation, he has not been consciously aware of a Being outside of nature which is necessarily responsible for it. His reasoning to metaphysics is based entirely on his own naturalistic categories derived from his own experience. According to Moses, it took God revealing Himself to the Hebrews for anyone to understand what Paine thinks anyone can plainly see.
The goal of deism is to hold onto what the western mind, which values extreme independence of thought, views as attractive in theism while casting aside what it finds distasteful. But as C.S. Lewis remarked, Aslan is not a tame lion. If a sovereign God exists, He cannot be limited by your desires of what you'd like Him to be. For this reason, the deism of men like Paine served as a cultural stepping stone toward the atheism of later intellectuals.
For Paine, as for other deists and atheists like him, it is not that Christianity has been subjected to reason and found wanting, but that it has been subjected to his own private and culturally-determined tastes and preferences and has failed to satisfy. This is the flipside of the anti-religious claim that those who believe in a given religion only do so because of their cultural conditioning: the anti-religionist is also conditioned in a similar way. Of course, how one comes to believe a certain thing has no bearing on whether that thing is true in itself, and this is true whether Christianity, atheism, or any other view is correct. But it must be stated that the deist or atheist is not immune from the epistemic difficulties which he so condescendingly heaps on theists.
One of the befuddling ironies of Paine's work is that around the time he was writing about the revealed religions as, “no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit," the French were turning churches into “temples of reason” and murdering thousands at the guillotine (an instrument of execution now most strongly identified with France's godless reign of terror). Paine, who nearly lost his own life during the French Revolution, saw the danger of this atheism and hoped to stay its progress, despite the risk to his own life in attempting to do so.
What is odd is that Paine managed to blame this violent atheism upon the Christian faith! Obfuscated Paine:
"The Idea, always dangerous to Society as it is derogatory to the Almighty, — that priests could forgive sins, — though it seemed to exist no longer, had blunted the feelings of humanity, and callously prepared men for the commission of all crimes. The intolerant spirit of church persecution had transferred itself into politics; the tribunals, stiled Revolutionary, supplied the place of an Inquisition; and the Guillotine of the Stake. I saw many of my most intimate friends destroyed; others daily carried to prison; and I had reason to believe, and had also intimations given me, that the same danger was approaching myself."
That Robespierre's deism finally managed to supplant the revolutionary state's atheism and that peace, love, and understanding did not then spread throughout the land undermines Paine's claims. Paine felt that the revolution in politics, especially as represented in America, would necessarily lead to a revolution in religion, and that this religious revolution would result in wide acceptance of deism. The common link between these two revolutions was the idea that the individual man was sovereign and could determine for himself what was right and wrong based on his autonomous reason. What Paine was too myopic to see was that in France's violence and atheism was found the logical consequence of his individualistic philosophy. In summary, it is not Christianity which is dangerous, but the spirit of autonomy which leads inevitably into authoritarianism by way of human desire.
As should be clear by now, Paine failed to understand that human beings have a strong tendency to set impartial reason aside and to simply evaluate reality based on their desires and psychological states. This is no more obvious than in his own ideas as expressed in The Age of Reason. Like Paine's tendency to designate every book in the Old Testament which he likes as having been written originally by a gentile and translated into Hebrew, so many of his criticisms of Christian theology are far more a reflection upon himself than of revealed Christianity. One has only to look at Paine's description of Jesus Christ as a “virtuous reformer and revolutionist” to marvel that Paine was so poor at introspection so as to not understand that he was describing himself.
There is much more that could be said about this work, but in the interest of being somewhat concise, I'll end my comments here. If you found this analysis to be useful, be sure to check out my profile and look for my work discussing Paine and other anti-Christian writers coming soon.
The book seems to have had three major objectives: the support of deism, the ridicule of what Paine found loathsome in Christian theology, and the demonstration of how poor an example the Bible is as a reflection of God.
In a sense, Paine's arguments against Christian theology and scripture were meant to prop up his deistic philosophy. Paine hoped that in demonizing Christianity while giving evidences for God, he would somehow have made the case for deism. But this is not so. If Christianity is false, but God exists nonetheless, we are not left only with deism. There are an infinite number of possibilities for us to examine regarding the nature of God, and far too many left over once we have eliminated the obviously false ones. In favor of deism Paine has only one argument—his dislike of supernatural revelation, which is to say that deism appeals to his culturally derived preferences. In any case, Paine's thinking on the matter seemed to be thus: if supernatural revelation could be shown to be inadequate and the development of complex theology shown to be an error, one could still salvage a belief in God as Creator, but not as an interloper in human affairs who required mediators.
That being said, in his support of deism, Paine makes some arguments to demonstrate the reasonableness in belief in, if not the logical necessity of the existence of, God which could be equally used by Christians.
For instance, just as the apostle Paul argued in his epistle to the Romans that, "what can be known about God is plain to [even pagans], because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20, ESV), so also Paine can say that, "the Creation speaketh an universal language [which points to the existence of God], independently of human speech or human language, multiplied and various as they be."
The key point on which Paine differs from Paul on this issue is in his optimism about man's ability to reason to God without His assisting from the outside. Whereas Paul sees the plainness of God from natural revelation as an argument against the inherent goodness of a species which can read the record of nature and nevertheless rejects its Source's obvious existence, Paine thinks that nature and reason can and do lead us directly to the knowledge of God's existence apart from any gracious overtures or direct revelation.
On the witness of nature, Paine claims, and is quite correct, that, "THE WORD OF GOD IS THE CREATION WE BEHOLD: And it is in this word, which no human invention can counterfeit or alter, that God speaketh universally to man." What is not plainly clear, however, is that man is free enough from the noetic effects of sin to reach such an obvious conclusion on his own. Indeed, the attempts of mankind to create a religion which represents the truth have invariably landed them at paganism. By paganism I mean a system of belief based, as Yehezkel Kaufmann and John N. Oswalt have shown, on continuity.iv In polytheism, even the supernatural is not really supernatural, but is perhaps in some way above humans while not being altogether distinct from us. What happens to the gods is merely what happens to human beings and the natural world writ large, which is why the gods are, like us, victims of fate, and why pagan fertility rituals have attempted to influence nature by influencing the gods which represent it in accordance with the deeper magic of the eternal universe we all inhabit.
When mankind has looked at nature without the benefit of supernatural revelation, he has not been consciously aware of a Being outside of nature which is necessarily responsible for it. His reasoning to metaphysics is based entirely on his own naturalistic categories derived from his own experience. According to Moses, it took God revealing Himself to the Hebrews for anyone to understand what Paine thinks anyone can plainly see.
The goal of deism is to hold onto what the western mind, which values extreme independence of thought, views as attractive in theism while casting aside what it finds distasteful. But as C.S. Lewis remarked, Aslan is not a tame lion. If a sovereign God exists, He cannot be limited by your desires of what you'd like Him to be. For this reason, the deism of men like Paine served as a cultural stepping stone toward the atheism of later intellectuals.
For Paine, as for other deists and atheists like him, it is not that Christianity has been subjected to reason and found wanting, but that it has been subjected to his own private and culturally-determined tastes and preferences and has failed to satisfy. This is the flipside of the anti-religious claim that those who believe in a given religion only do so because of their cultural conditioning: the anti-religionist is also conditioned in a similar way. Of course, how one comes to believe a certain thing has no bearing on whether that thing is true in itself, and this is true whether Christianity, atheism, or any other view is correct. But it must be stated that the deist or atheist is not immune from the epistemic difficulties which he so condescendingly heaps on theists.
One of the befuddling ironies of Paine's work is that around the time he was writing about the revealed religions as, “no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit," the French were turning churches into “temples of reason” and murdering thousands at the guillotine (an instrument of execution now most strongly identified with France's godless reign of terror). Paine, who nearly lost his own life during the French Revolution, saw the danger of this atheism and hoped to stay its progress, despite the risk to his own life in attempting to do so.
What is odd is that Paine managed to blame this violent atheism upon the Christian faith! Obfuscated Paine:
"The Idea, always dangerous to Society as it is derogatory to the Almighty, — that priests could forgive sins, — though it seemed to exist no longer, had blunted the feelings of humanity, and callously prepared men for the commission of all crimes. The intolerant spirit of church persecution had transferred itself into politics; the tribunals, stiled Revolutionary, supplied the place of an Inquisition; and the Guillotine of the Stake. I saw many of my most intimate friends destroyed; others daily carried to prison; and I had reason to believe, and had also intimations given me, that the same danger was approaching myself."
That Robespierre's deism finally managed to supplant the revolutionary state's atheism and that peace, love, and understanding did not then spread throughout the land undermines Paine's claims. Paine felt that the revolution in politics, especially as represented in America, would necessarily lead to a revolution in religion, and that this religious revolution would result in wide acceptance of deism. The common link between these two revolutions was the idea that the individual man was sovereign and could determine for himself what was right and wrong based on his autonomous reason. What Paine was too myopic to see was that in France's violence and atheism was found the logical consequence of his individualistic philosophy. In summary, it is not Christianity which is dangerous, but the spirit of autonomy which leads inevitably into authoritarianism by way of human desire.
As should be clear by now, Paine failed to understand that human beings have a strong tendency to set impartial reason aside and to simply evaluate reality based on their desires and psychological states. This is no more obvious than in his own ideas as expressed in The Age of Reason. Like Paine's tendency to designate every book in the Old Testament which he likes as having been written originally by a gentile and translated into Hebrew, so many of his criticisms of Christian theology are far more a reflection upon himself than of revealed Christianity. One has only to look at Paine's description of Jesus Christ as a “virtuous reformer and revolutionist” to marvel that Paine was so poor at introspection so as to not understand that he was describing himself.
There is much more that could be said about this work, but in the interest of being somewhat concise, I'll end my comments here. If you found this analysis to be useful, be sure to check out my profile and look for my work discussing Paine and other anti-Christian writers coming soon.