Is Indy an atheist (in Raiders)?

Montana Smith · Jun 14, 2010

Rocket Surgeon said:
I always took it as getting a glimpse at events and places that were secret and hidden. The wing was under development and as far as the one captured on screen, who's to say it wasn't a prototype?

Are you quite sure we're not seeing the forebearers of the Afrika Korps.

Fantasy, while appropriate, really conjures up images of laser guns. Which they could have easily rounded up from LFL, but they didn't.

The reason Raiders is universally loved is because it is so "grounded", and things like a leap across a "bottomless" pit are fantastic, tense and thrilling...a long way from jumping mine carts, meeting Hitler of riding the Frigidaire.

It's pulp, as we know. The best kind of pulp. Pulp takes liberties with reality in order to take adventure to the limits. As grounded as Raiders was, it has a style different to something like Saving Private Ryan.

Now that I'm really getting into Bond I can see that Indy is stylistically in that camp. I agree that the Indy movies that followed the first have progressively stretched the limits of Raiders, but amid it all the character of Indy is intact. The thing that binds them is (and I've said this countless times) his supernatural level of good luck. It was only natural that the cliffhangers would get more and more extreme, just as Bond movies got more extreme, until they took a reality check with Daniel Craig.

So, I still see the four Indy movies as part of a whole, and his experiences with different gods as defining his view of his particular world.

Walton · Jun 14, 2010

Attila the Professor said:
Aren't we dealing with too many different sorts of vices and virtues to really rank them?

My point was not to rank vice and virtue. My point is that it is conceivable that if something greater than man exists (IDBs, for instance), then conceivably something greater than IDBs exists...and so on until we arrive at an ultimate...that is, someone with whom there is no equal or better...a true ultimate...an actual and undeniable God.

Because if it claims to be the ultimate and is not, then it is a liar...on top of being second rate. And if there's one thing I can't see Indy doing, it is settling for second rate anything.

Montana Smith said:
So, I still see the four Indy movies as part of a whole, and his experiences with different gods as defining his view of his particular world.

Definitely. :gun:

Attila the Professor · Jun 14, 2010

Walton said:
Never mind that I'm speaking from my beliefs. The very concept of a champion entails a singularity. Surely, champion status can be shared, but it does not need to be...as even in shared champion status, there is a "best of the best."

Walton said:
My point was not to rank vice and virtue. My point is that it is conceivable that if something greater than man exists (IDBs, for instance), then conceivably something greater than IDBs exists...and so on until we arrive at an ultimate...that is, someone with whom there is no equal or better...a true ultimate...an actual and undeniable God.

It's just unclear to me why the concept of a champion is internal to the concept of multiple gods. I went into all that about rankings just to say that if you're going to claim weaponry and vices and virtues as analogies, I'm still not sure that that bolsters your argument, as I don't think the notion of an ultimate really works there either. The films don't give us any metric by which to compare the various higher beings.

Montana Smith · Jun 15, 2010

Attila the Professor said:
The films don't give us any metric by which to compare the various higher beings.

That's where the films have their success, from my viewpoint. They leave the supernatural unexplained, keeping interpretation open-ended. They retain their mystery, even after KOTCS.

Mickiana · Jun 15, 2010

Observing the existence of aliens won't make Indy any more open to believing in any higher god or omnipotent being or creator or whatever. He will only have questions, because the question is all there is.

Walton · Jun 15, 2010

Attila the Professor said:
The films don't give us any metric by which to compare the various higher beings.

The films don't need to provide that. We do that. Look around the forums. What's the best Indy MacGuffin? Which film is best? Why this over that, why that over this, rank, rank, rank...

Give the fans some credit, Attila. They don't need to be spoon-fed a metric by the films.

And as I was saying to Montana, we have to assume they are as they are in the real world (according to history and/or holy book/manuscript) unless the film specifically states otherwise (as in KOTCS). There isn't time to write the Indiana Jones Universe version of the Bible, the Qur'an, etc.

Montana Smith said:
That's where the films have their success, from my viewpoint. They leave the supernatural unexplained, keeping interpretation open-ended. They retain their mystery, even after KOTCS.

Well put, Montana.

Mickiana said:
Observing the existence of aliens won't make Indy any more open to believing in any higher god or omnipotent being or creator or whatever. He will only have questions, because the question is all there is.

Indy is smart. When he gets answers, he'll make use of them...even if the result is more questions. That's a basic function of life.

If all you do is discard answers because you have more questions, then the pursuit of getting answers becomes meaningless. The answers you get lay a foundation for the new questions you have.

Attila the Professor · Jun 15, 2010

Walton said:
The films don't need to provide that. We do that. Look around the forums. What's the best Indy MacGuffin? Which film is best? Why this over that, why that over this, rank, rank, rank...

Give the fans some credit, Attila. They don't need to be spoon-fed a metric by the films.

And as I was saying to Montana, we have to assume they are as they are in the real world (according to history and/or holy book/manuscript) unless the film specifically states otherwise (as in KOTCS). There isn't time to write the Indiana Jones Universe version of the Bible, the Qur'an, etc.

These also strike me as being rather different sorts of questions. The idea of the Ultimate God is something that isn't really up for debate - that is, if there is one, it's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact - while all of those other questions are matters that can be argued.

And I think it might be worth giving the filmmakers some credit. Maybe they gave no indications of any sort of metric because they feel that there <I>should not be one</I>. The films never suggested that the Christian God had replaced the Jewish God, or that the followers of Shiva and Kali are engaged in some backwater family feud, or that these gods are just stories told to deal with the fact of those aliens Indy came across. They are contained mythologies, and I don't see where the urge to rank comes in or where the means to do it can come from.

The primary question we're speaking about now is about divinity. I'm not sure how useful extrapolations from our world really are, especially since most people, I suspect, don't think that we live in a world living under the auspices of dozens of different deities.

Oh, and to put on my moderator's hat for a moment: when you're responding to and quoting multiple people in a thread at a single time, it's advised to put all of those in a single post. You can do this either with some copying-and-pasting after clicking on links to quote each post you're interested in or by copying-and-pasting the text into your post and then adding the quote tags yourself.

Walton · Jun 15, 2010

Attila the Professor said:
The primary question we're speaking about now is about divinity. I'm not sure how useful extrapolations from our world really are, especially since most people, I suspect, don't think that we live in a world living under the auspices of dozens of different deities.

No, most people see whatever happens in the world as being directly related to their deity of choice and claims of other religions as false or at least irrelevant. (This is even true of atheists, who see the world as being directly related to no deity at all...call it chance or evolution or super-heroic luck.)

But if you want to talk facts, the fact is that hundreds of deities are represented throughout the world by their worshipers. And they are real inasmuch as their worshipers continue to worship them. Whether they are truly real - would they cease to exist if no one worshiped them? - is another matter entirely.

Attila the Professor · Jun 15, 2010

Walton said:
But if you want to talk facts, the fact is that hundreds of deities are represented throughout the world by their worshipers. And they are real inasmuch as their worshipers continue to worship them. Whether they are truly real - would they cease to exist if no one worshiped them? - is another matter entirely.

But in the world of Indiana Jones, we must accept them as truly real, or otherwise accept some other power masquerading in their place. Worship isn't the relevant question.

Montana Smith · Jun 15, 2010

Attila the Professor said:
But in the world of Indiana Jones, we must accept them as truly real, or otherwise accept some other power masquerading in their place. Worship isn't the relevant question.

Yes, this is what I was getting at before. It seems to me that you have to see Indy's world as separated from our own (by how many degrees of separation is down to personal choice).

Therefore, what occurs within Indy's world obeys the laws of Indy's world - which will explain anachronisms and the matter of physics.

In Indy's world there was some form of power emanating from the Ark; some form of power from the Grail cup; some form of power in India that incorporated voodoo and other elements, attributed to Kali; and then finally we see creatures from another dimension who have been assisting humanity for thousands of years.

It seems wrong to place a personal faith from the real world onto all the elements, to incorporate them all into one world view with a Hebrew/Christian God as it's pinnacle. That isn't how the stories are presented to us - instead we are given a world full of strange powers and creatures, which as Mickiana wrote earlier, leaves us, and Indy, with questions.

The films can be seen in any way that pleases the individual viewer, but it doesn't mean that it's the only way.

Personally I like the idea that the Inter-Dimensionals are as high as divinity goes, and that their relationship with Peru in Indy explains the light trap in 1936.

I can understand gods more easily as 'aliens' than I can as elemental spirits, or the bickering super-beings of Greek and Roman mythology. For me it would suit Indy's world that aliens and other material creatures of higher intelligence are the meddlers, tricksters, and assistants of man. Just as mythological creatures from multiple cultures exist in Hellboy, alongside terrifying angels and demons.

Indy must believe in these powers, though he needn't worship them. There is a difference between belief and worship. Just as there is a difference between respect and worship. There are those who believe in both God and the Devil, yet most would surely only worship one of them.

Picking up on your earlier post, Attila, where you referred to the "contained mythologies" within the Indy films: it would seem that each mythology is contained with it's proven power: Hebrew mythology for the Ark; Christian mythology for the Grail; Indian mythology for Kali; and lastly a Daeniken mythology for ancient astronauts/aliens.

This is the diversity of Indy's world. Each myth is proven on one level by it's power, yet, ultimately we still don't know the nature of gods or aliens, or whether they are one and the same, or multiple and contradictory. Whatever ever they are, they are real for Indy.

Walton · Jun 15, 2010

Montana Smith said:
Yes, this is what I was getting at before. It seems to me that you have to see Indy's world as separated from our own (by how many degrees of separation is down to personal choice).

It seems wrong to place a personal faith from the real world onto all the elements, to incorporate them all into one world view with a Hebrew/Christian God as it's pinnacle.

You have chosen to see Indy's world as such. Others have not.

Your two statements contradict each other. Indy's world is separate by degrees based on personal choice...but personal faith should be left out of the equation? Personal faith sounds like a personal choice to me.

Montana Smith · Jun 15, 2010

Walton said:
You have chosen to see Indy's world as such. Others have not.

Your two statements contradict each other. Indy's world is separate by degrees based on personal choice...but personal faith should be left out of the equation? Personal faith sounds like a personal choice to me.

Indy's world is quite obviously not our own. It is the world seen in pulp terms. A world created foremost for adventure.

As such it obeys its own logic, it allows for the supernatural to occur as a real element. Within that world there is at no point a statement that says Kali is really another name for the Christian God. You said yourself that "Kali is Kali", and therefore a real power within that world.

If Lucas and Spielberg had intended that the world they created be dominated by a single God it would be made clear, rather than introduce other gods with proven powers.

Lucas and Spielberg created a world of mystery. It is an open world that can be defined however the individual viewer wishes according to their faith, but to do so limits the extent of Indy's world.

Walton · Jun 15, 2010

Montana Smith said:
Indy's world is quite obviously not our own. It is the world seen in pulp terms. A world created foremost for adventure.

As such it obeys its own logic, it allows for the supernatural to occur as a real element. Within that world there is at no point a statement that says Kali is really another name for the Christian God. You said yourself that "Kali is Kali", and therefore a real power within that world.

If Lucas and Spielberg had intended that the world they created be dominated by a single God it would be made clear, rather than introduce other gods with proven powers.

Lucas and Spielberg created a world of mystery. It is an open world that can be defined however the individual viewer wishes according to their faith, but to do so limits the extent of Indy's world.

Right, and I also said that Satan and Kali can be considered similar but distinct evil entities...that is, demonic, which, being evil, would mean that they oppose God (specifically) or the good (generally). I thought we'd covered this.

Where you see limitations according to faith, I see grounds for discussion. It's not a limitation except to you and those who agree with your viewpoint. But go ahead and have the hang up if you must.

Raiders90 · Jun 15, 2010

Montana Smith said:
Yes, this is what I was getting at before. It seems to me that you have to see Indy's world as separated from our own (by how many degrees of separation is down to personal choice).

Therefore, what occurs within Indy's world obeys the laws of Indy's world - which will explain anachronisms and the matter of physics.

In Indy's world there was some form of power emanating from the Ark; some form of power from the Grail cup; some form of power in India that incorporated voodoo and other elements, attributed to Kali; and then finally we see creatures from another dimension who have been assisting humanity for thousands of years.

It seems wrong to place a personal faith from the real world onto all the elements, to incorporate them all into one world view with a Hebrew/Christian God as it's pinnacle. That isn't how the stories are presented to us - instead we are given a world full of strange powers and creatures, which as Mickiana wrote earlier, leaves us, and Indy, with questions.

The films can be seen in any way that pleases the individual viewer, but it doesn't mean that it's the only way.

Personally I like the idea that the Inter-Dimensionals are as high as divinity goes, and that their relationship with Peru in Indy explains the light trap in 1936.

I can understand gods more easily as 'aliens' than I can as elemental spirits, or the bickering super-beings of Greek and Roman mythology. For me it would suit Indy's world that aliens and other material creatures of higher intelligence are the meddlers, tricksters, and assistants of man. Just as mythological creatures from multiple cultures exist in Hellboy, alongside terrifying angels and demons.

Indy must believe in these powers, though he needn't worship them. There is a difference between belief and worship. Just as there is a difference between respect and worship. There are those who believe in both God and the Devil, yet most would surely only worship one of them.

Picking up on your earlier post, Attila, where you referred to the "contained mythologies" within the Indy films: it would seem that each mythology is contained with it's proven power: Hebrew mythology for the Ark; Christian mythology for the Grail; Indian mythology for Kali; and lastly a Daeniken mythology for ancient astronauts/aliens.

This is the diversity of Indy's world. Each myth is proven on one level by it's power, yet, ultimately we still don't know the nature of gods or aliens, or whether they are one and the same, or multiple and contradictory. Whatever ever they are, they are real for Indy.

I think making the "Aliens" into ancient mythological deities would've probably made the fans happier. I mean after all as you said, the Greco-Roman deities did help man in many of the stories, for example didn't one of their Gods teach man about fire? The "Aliens" serve the same purpose as Gods in KOTCS, so I don't get why there was such a need to make them outrightly generic gray aliens (with a stereotypical '50s alien spaceship to boot).

The artifacts in none of the Indy stories, whether games, TV, novels or other media ever, were based around the period in which the story took place. For example, the Ark wasn't a 1930s hot artifact--It's an artifact which has mystified man since Biblical times, same with the Grail, same with any of the other artifacts Indy found or looked for.

Aliens were a staple of the 1950s, an icon of that era really only, both in their presentation in KOTCS and their space ship. As I said, none of Indy's previous artifacts were wrapped around the period in which the adventure took place. It seems like instead of the period fitting the adventure, Lucas made KOTCS fit the period. Whereas Indy's adventures used the 1930s as a background, here the 1950s is in the foreground, from Doom Town (which really served purpose as far as plot is concerned) to the Aliens. Sort of the reverse of the other films.

It just seems like Lucas really wanted to relive his '50s nostalgia which he had in the 70s by making the 1950s period heavy handed in KOTCS. I mean yes the original films are set in the 30s but outside of Indy's clothes and the Nazis as enemies nothing really made the films ''1930s period films''.

Montana Smith · Jun 15, 2010

Raiders112390 said:
I think making the "Aliens" into ancient mythological deities would've probably made the fans happier. I mean after all as you said, the Greco-Roman deities did help man in many of the stories, for example didn't one of their Gods teach man about fire?

That was Prometheus, who can also be seen as Lucifer 'the Light-Bearer', who is also Satan, which again brings into question the nature of good and evil, and of the nature of deities in the Indy movies.

Just to add to the complexities of Indy's world, then, you could see the Inter-Dimensionals as the material evidence of the Lucifer story. Now where would that leave Indy's belief system?

Walton · Jun 16, 2010

Montana Smith said:
That was Prometheus, who can also be seen as Lucifer 'the Light-Bearer', who is also Satan, which again brings into question the nature of good and evil, and of the nature of deities in the Indy movies.

But...Kali is Kali? So now Prometheus is Satan/Lucifer?

I thought we were on the same page here, Montana? Not combining spiritual entities from different stories into one conglomerate being.

Montana Smith · Jun 16, 2010

Walton said:
But...Kali is Kali? So now Prometheus is Satan/Lucifer?

I thought we were on the same page here, Montana? Not combining spiritual entities from different stories into one conglomerate being.

In Indy's world Kali was Kali, as far as Indy was concerned, as the supernatural is a proven element.

In our world the supernatural remains unproven, and therefore remains in the realm of myth.

Standing outside Indy's world we can trace the connections between myths, such as Prometheus who was thrown down into torment by the gods for giving fire/knowledge to man; and Lucifer who was cast out of heaven, who also happens to bear an epithet (Light-Bringer) which similar to Prometheus'.

In KOTCS Indy sees evidence that the IDBs have been bringing knowledge to man for thousands of years. If the myths of Prometheus and of Lucifer are the same in his world as in ours, the similarity won't be lost on Indy.

He will still see the existence of a power identified as Kali, and he will now see the existence of more material creatures who fit mythical stories from different cultures.

That doesn't conflict with the way in which the four films are presented to us - we are presented with the Hebrew God, Kali, the Christian God and then the material IDBs. What Indy learns from his experience with the IDBs we may never know, as the next movie (if it happens) will likely move onto yet another myth, while leaving the questions unanswered.

Walton · Jun 16, 2010

Ah.

Montana Smith said:
What Indy learns from his experience with the IDBs we may never know, as the next movie (if it happens) will likely move onto yet another myth, while leaving the questions unanswered.

We can only hope. As, if we stay too long on any one of them, it would detract from what makes these films successful...their openness to interpretation. I think we agree on that.

Montana Smith · Jun 16, 2010

Walton said:
Ah.

We can only hope. As, if we stay too long on any one of them, it would detract from what makes these films successful...their openness to interpretation. I think we agree on that.

Yes, the unanswered questions, such as the one that began this eventful thread. We can only interpret them based on what we're given in-movie, in-script, in-novelization, and, for the first two films, in-West End Games authorized roleplaying game(!)

Walton · Jun 16, 2010

Montana Smith said:
Yes, the unanswered questions, such as the one that began this eventful thread. We can only interpret them based on what we're given in-movie, in-script, in-novelization, and, for the first two films, in-West End Games authorized roleplaying game(!)

Now that's something I haven't been able to find locally...the RPG books.

Yeah, it basically comes down to a battle of opinions based on what each fan wants Indy to be. If he's got faith in any one God, he's a skeptic all the way about it. Which is safe, even wise, because he won't get caught up in emotional hype. No matter what comes his way, he'll test it.

Even though Indy is fiction, he does set an example that I believe should be emulated...test everything. One of the criticisms I have about Christianity (and I am a follower of Christ, so take this as an insider's commentary) is too many are riding an emotional wave that they consider a compass for determining God's will (the church version of "if it feels good, do it") and too many more use the Christian terminology as a manipulative device over others, what with "God told me so" and all that. Too few actually scrutinize the things they perceive to be "leading" them.

Is Indy an atheist (in Raiders)?

Active member

New member

Moderator

Active member

Well-known member

New member

Moderator

New member

Moderator

Active member

New member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

New member

Active member

New member

Active member

New member