CS Lewis’ ‘The Chronicles Of Narnia’ Begins

Never having read any of ‘The Chronicles of Narnia’ books by CS Lewis (mostly because I feared I would be preached to), I still find myself excited by the preview of the first movie installment ‘The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe’. It’s a curious-making trailer and Disney could have a hugely successful franchise on par with The Lord Of The Rings movies and the Star Wars phenomenon.

Of the 5 reasons listed on the Moviefone website as to why this venture may be a huge success, #5 may be the most convincing:

In fact, the Lewis books’ much-explored Christian allegorical themes are already inspiring some to predict box office success to rival the awesome take of that behemoth Christian non-allegory, ‘The Passion of the Christ.’

The non-allegory of ‘The Passion of the Christ’? They’re kidding, right?

I’m not overly pleased that it may be a huge thrill for Christians to see these books made into movies or that it will promote Christian ideals but I expected a venture to counter the satanic messages the Harry Potter books and movies contained. LOL

Disney has further committed to movie adaptations of the next 2 books in CS Lewis’  Narnia series. This first one could suck but dayum, it sure has a purty trailer! Check it out!

173 thoughts on “CS Lewis’ ‘The Chronicles Of Narnia’ Begins

  1. You might actually like Lewis.  As an atheist I disagree with his ultimate conclusion but he is thoughtful, interesting, funny, and has insights into human nature as well as the Christian myth.

    I’d love to see The Screwtape Letters made into a movie with demonic narration (the text of the letters) over the live-action situations represented.  Lewis said he wrote the book “not to speculate on demonic life but to throw light from a new angle on the lives of men.”

    (By which he meant, “men and women” but that was another time.)

    I’d also like to see The Space Trilogy” made into 3 movies but NOT by Steven Spielberg or George Lucas.  For one thing, the middle movie would have a green naked chick on screen most of the time.  (And captain Kirk nowhere in sight!)

  2. Sorry, I should have rearranged that paragraph.  The middle book Perelandra has a green naked chick in it, and that’s an asset to almost any story.  I just didn’t want Spielberg or Lucas doing the movie.

  3. I love these books, but I won’t be seeing the movie.  I have my own pictures of how things should be and I don’t think any film maker could capture what me imagination does.  I would hate to be disappointed the way I was with the Lord of the Rings.

  4. I read the book and saw the original “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe”—which sucked. I saw this trailer attached to “Revenge of the Sith” and thought, “well, well, well, they’re taking another stab at it.” I have to admit, this one looks a lot better than the original. Hopefully it will stay true to the book and manage to outperform its predecessor at the same time.

  5. I agree with DoF’s assessment.  CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien were friends, and it’s interesting to compare Narnia and Middle Earth.

    While Tolkien’s epos is of course much more detailed, it tends towards the emotional flatness of Beowulf and the Nibelungenlied, and most of the characters seem to be more embodiments of ideals than real people.  Not that I don’t love the Ring cycle- it’s the best epic I know of.

    The Narnia books are much simpler, but somehow livlier and more believable.  The Christianity preached in them is pretty ecumenical- the heathen Calormenes (read “Muslims”) in the last book get into Heaven too, as long as they are true of heart. Not fundie fare.

    Of course, women get the short end of the stick in both series, but that’s life in Anglo Saxon epics and the Bible.  At least we have Galadriel and Lucy.

  6. What? You have a problem with green naked chicks?

    “I ain’t bein’ racist, but if the bitch is green there’s somethin’ wrong with the pussy!” Thus spaketh Eddie Murphy.  tongue wink

    Trailer looks good… but I’ll likely wait til this one’s on DVD (like most movies).

  7. I almost made it through the first book, but I had to stop when I came to the realization that the really annoying children weren’t going to die horrible deaths.

    One of the few books that I never finished reading.  I would put them right up there with all the god awful S.E. hinton books I had to read in public high school.

  8. I read the books when I was 12 or 13, and never attached any r3eligious significance to them. It wasn’t until much later, when I was in my 20’s, after I started reading articles and so forth, that I saw where there could be a christian theme to these books. I don’t really see how any early teen reading these books, would ever equate them with being religious books.

    I will see the movies, and probably be just as dissapointed with them as I was with the Lord of the Rings, which I read when I was 14. There were just too many important parts left out of the movies, it’s the old “how to condense 10,000,000 words into 3 hrs or less thing”. Darn near impossible. My daughter who has never read the books, and so had no preknowledge to color her views, thought the movies were wonderful.

  9. I should mention I’ve read almost all of Lewis’ books except the Chronicles of Narnia.  Too long, never liked magical themes.

    I liked the LOTR movies, but never read those books either for the same reasons.  Waited for the movie.

  10. I read the entire Chronicles shortly after high school, and enjoyed them for the most part.  Maybe I wasn’t paying attention, but I missed the analogy to Christianity, and so when I reached the last few pages of book 7 I thought, “Oh, yuck!”

    But there was a scene in one story that has always bothered me.  I can’t remember which book, it’s been too long.  But I think someone was trying to help a Prince escape from the bad guys.  During the escape a lion attacks the Prince and claws him up pretty badly.  Later Aslan explains that he was that lion and that he attacked the Prince to punish him for something he did.  At the time I thought the punishment seemed harsh and unjust—it seemed to me the Prince acted out of ignorance?  I can’t recall.  Anyone remember this scene?

    —Joe

  11. Cindy – you were disappointed with LotR? – Jeebers what more do people want! – you must have one wizz-bang imagination if you found the movie wanting!(and ive just finished the trilogy for the umpteenth time! – I just think people get a little precious with thier “sacred” books sometimes) I mean for crying out loud!;Gandalfs fall from the bridge and subsequent Balrog battle wasnt quite right? I was frankly gobsmacked with wonder watching those movies.WooHoo!

  12. I read the entire Narnia series in summer school between 3rd and 4th grade, and I loved them.  Never realized it was trying to sound christian, but that’s because I really had no contact with religion—at the time, my mother was Pagan, and dad… well, he always describes himself as being raised Catholic, but gave it up for Lent.  *shrug*

    I need to reread that series.  Its been a while.

  13. Joe- I don’t know of any scene where Aslan claws a Prince.  He claws Eustace up in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader to help him get rid of his dragon skin, and he claws Aravis in The Horse and his Boy to teach her what her slave felt like being whipped.

    Frumpa, I’m with you about the LotR films.  Of course it’s an impossible task to condense the trilogy to a few hours in the movie theater.  They had to cut a lot.  And in doing so, they necessarily altered the story quite a bit.  But they managed to do an amazingly good job.  Yes, Frodo’s dream of Gandalf’s fall with the Balrog was not in the book.  But it was very cool.  And Arwen actually got to do something in the film other than be decorative.  The only change I thought was not in character was making Faramir so menacing, dragging Frodo and Sam off with him.

  14. …and he claws Aravis in The Horse and his Boy to teach her what her slave felt like being whipped.

    Ah yes!  That’s the one!  I looked on the ‘net to see what had happened.  Aravis was arranged to be married and didn’t want to go through with it, so she slipped her maid a sleeping potion so she could escape.  The next day the maid was whipped for letting Aravis get away.  Thus, Aslan clawed Aravis to teach a lesson, to see how it felt to be whipped.

    I guess I’d have to read the book again to see why I felt (as a 20 year old in 1985) that this seemed harsh and cruel.  Perhaps it’s just too “eye for an eye” (Old Testament), as opposed to WWJD (and isn’t Aslan a parallel to Jesus Christ?).  I doubt he would’ve taken a whip to Aravis.

    But this begs the question familiar to most atheists:  if Aslan is all powerful, all knowing, blah blah blah, why is he permitting evil to exist in Narnia, why does he let people suffer in despair, then punish them for acting under compulsion, etc. etc.?

    —Joe

  15. Hehe, nobody ever said religion is rational!  I also read the Chronicles way back around 1980 or so.  I was able to catch the Christian symbolism, but it wasn’t too offputting at the time.  It might be a different matter now, especially with the Fundies trying to warp the US sociopolitical fabric to their own ends.  It seems that some of the Western “good vs evil” books tend to lean a little toward the Christian mythos which is probably why I have been reading more of “gray vs gray” type fiction lately.  Cthulhu for President 2008!!! LOL

  16. From the reports (at least early ones), the “overt” Christian references in the Narnia series are due to be Disneyfied out of existence, leaving a nice special effects fest and harmless fantasy adventure.  So don’t worry about being preached at …

    A pity, because I always found some of the religious themes—the Christ-like sacrifice of Aslan in the first (TLTWatW) book in particular—nicely done and refreshingly presented from a different perspective.  I’ve also found the non-staid nature of Aslan—“he’s not a *tame* lion”—to be refreshing as well.

    Yeah, the kids can be annoying, but the books are written for kids, so …

  17. Besides being interested in the movie; after all that’s been said here, I’ll probably be stopping by the library to check out the books…I’m a big kid now – I can handle them.

  18. i could have swore that this had been started at some time.. eghem.. the lion the witch and the wardrobe flick on pbs ages ago..  i enjoyed all of the books around the 5th grade.. never read any c.s.lewis after.. the chronicles of narnia was a christian rag?!?! wtf.
    I still like em.

    run into but out of that onion or whatever they meant by sweet water at the end..

  19. The trouble with being a voracious reader is that sometimes it’s difficult to remember whether one book or another is among the tens of thousands I’ve read… especially it’s been put on film.  I’m pretty sure I read LW&W in grade school (a LONG time ago), but I also recall seeing an animated version at some point so I can’t be absolutely certain.

    Like most movies – I’m sure to see this one… on DVD LOL

    I quite clearly remember reading The Screwtape Letters though; I believe I was 14, and I read it over a weekend while visiting with my Dad, whose bookshelves had all sorts of interesting fare.  It’d be pretty damned cool to see THAT on film!

  20. Many of my favorite books have been made into movies and I’ve been okay with them.  The Harry Potter movies have been cute and Born On The Fourth Of July was excellent, but sometimes when you just fall in love with a book or character seeing someone elses version of it is a disappointment.

  21. I loved the books as a kid (now 42 yrs old)..I have a question..anyone of you out there saved? I’m sure the guy who didn’t want to be “preached at” obviously isn’t..i was a non-believer, atheist or whatever term works for you but by the grace of God His Mercy on me changed my life forever (that’s eternal life, not temporal)I had gone through years of partying, whoring you nmae it, I was in it or all over it..then years later had gotten married because we were expecting a child..didn’t even love the woman..just thought it was the right thing to do..well..2 kids and then a divorce 7 years later left me pretty screwed up and when I cried out to God He heard and took that pain and misery and gave me such peace and Joy..God is better than ANY drug or orgasm we could possibly fathom in our little feeble minds..God is truly amazing ..and for you atheists..He’s real and very much alive quite contrary to Nietzsche’s pathetic parable…

      Andrew

  22. Funny thing is, Andrew, I was thinking the same thing about you.

    If belief in a sky fairy works for you then more power to you, but some of us have tried that already and decided there wasn’t anything there to believe in.

  23. Les,

      I guess you probably believe in the Big Bang theory too, huh?..we just sort of evolved out of slime..some cosmic mucus or something..yeah,right..
      You did prove or reiterate a point that some Christians actually disagree on..whether we were predestined as in, God chooses us we don’t choose God. I believe God chose me.I believe He creates situations and circumstances for us to cry out to Him so it would seem that we chose Him…pretty arogant in itself to think we can snap our fingers and God would be there to do our bidding..HA!..so maybe, just maybe Les it wasn’t your time when you first “tried religion” or whatever you did..or maybe you aren’t part of the chosen….again, our feeble little limited minds find it difficult or impossible to conceive in a Supreme Being unless you do have the Holy Spirit residing in you..so, I was like you for almost 42 years of my life..how foolish I was..God stands outside of time(He can..He’s God..He “made the concept” if you will)..He has seen the beginning and end of this world. Everyone will know his Sovereignty one day.
      I’m glad I know where I’ll go after I die on this earth…my soul, that is..oh, wait..you probably don’t believe you have one of those either..again, pity..

  24. I guess you probably believe in the Big Bang theory too, huh?..we just sort of evolved out of slime..some cosmic mucus or something..yeah,right..

    Your ignorance is showing. You cite one theory and then go on to provide an over-simplified explanation to a completely different and unrelated theory.

    You did prove or reiterate a point that some Christians actually disagree on..whether we were predestined as in, God chooses us we don’t choose God. I believe God chose me.I believe He creates situations and circumstances for us to cry out to Him so it would seem that we chose Him…pretty arogant in itself to think we can snap our fingers and God would be there to do our bidding..HA!

    It’s pretty arrogant to think there’s anything particularly special about us as a species that there’d be any reason for us to have an “afterlife” regardless of what form it should take.

    so maybe, just maybe Les it wasn’t your time when you first “tried religion

  25. Les,

      I’m sorry if I came across as “holier than thou” earlier. It really wasn’t my place nor style. It is definitely your business what you believe or disbelieve in.
      Thanks for responding though, I appreciate that.

      Andrew

  26. Ah jeebers – now he comes across all apologetic and friendly like (just like a lot of other T.B’s once backed in a corner)
    How about this Andrew? -Why dont you actually REPLY TO LES’S COMMENTS ,before wiggling off on some other tangent….Yeah – we know,ya gotta have faith – proof is’nt nessesary,blah,blah,blah.

  27. Frumpa,

      The reason I didn’t respond to Les is that it would be pointless in trying to “convince” him just as his opinion or theory won’t change my mind because I do believe in God.
      A co-worker (a pastor’s son no less) went through 22 years hearing his father teach and preach about God. He learned from his dad and others and could quote scripture and argue that God did exist, but did he actually believe? No, because God didn’t reveal Himself to him. It wasn’t his time. When he was saved I could see such a miraculous change in him and I was genuinely happy for him, but had NO idea what he was experiencing. He could verbally explain till he was blue in the face, but again, God has to choose to show Himself. Then about 3 weeks later, God did reveal Himself to me and saved me. This I know. No amount of explanation is going to make sense to you or anyone unless God decides to show you or if it’s even in His will to show you. This is not a put-down or an insult. So again, it’s pointless to even have any rational discussion because you don’t know or believe in God. If God chooses to show Himself and change you, He will. If He doesn’t, He won’t. That’s all I can really say to break any discussion or theory down to a simplistic, final denominator.
      Also, true faith comes from God. We ourselves   (outside of God) may have a self-professed faith which is flimsy at best. It will never hold up.  If you went through so much physical pain or anguish, what little faith you might have on your own would diminish or be gone.
      All I can do is to pray that God will show Himself to you if it’s in His will.

        Andrew

  28. So Andrew, when I’m frying in hell it’ll be because God didn’t reveal Himself to me?  And what’s the deal with praying that he’ll reveal Himself to certain people?  Enough people pray, and He says, “Oh, all right, I’ll reveal Myself to that person.” 

    If that’s what your god is like, he’s all yours.

  29. What Andrew is suffering from I think is best described as Delusional Psychosis complicated by Stockholm Syndrome.
    The insidiousness of this disease to me at least is horrifying.

  30. decrepitoldfool,

      I’ll reiterate from my last posting. You and others that don’t know God will not and cannot understand.

      Andrew

  31. Nunyabiz,

      Did you learn or BELIEVE that in a Psych 101 class? You either believe or you don’t believe.
      Funny though that you or others would think that Christianity, (having the most believers of all the major religions of the world)it’s members (were talking about millions upon millions here) all suffer from some kind of psychosis or some other psycho-babble theory that man has devised to feel comfortble about being a sinner.
      AGAIN, if you don’t believe, you don’t believe.

      Andrew

  32. Shared Psychosis (folie a deux) or Mass Hysteria is not uncommon among those suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

    http://www.devilzown.com/psychosisreligion.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_hysteria

    Andrew clearly suffers from what Freud called credo quia absurdum,

    “is said to be of a violent nature. This perspective maintains that the religious doctrines of the early Christian church are outside of the jurisdiction of human reason. It is a position that says that their truth must be felt inward, it need not be comprehended. But this is surely an absurd position. If the truth requires something above reason—an subjective experience—how can we expect that reason has any value at all, and what of those who have not had such an experience. There is no obligation for humanity to employ reason at all, and there is an exclusive means of determining what truth is—those that have not experienced it as the church says it is do not know the truth.”

    Basically the Fundamentalist Zealot is “Afraid of Religion so long as they consider it a part of the reality to which they belong”.

    Being afraid of your own Cognition you are frightened to even question it in rational terms.

    Freud further states:

    Rather it is our custom to introduce the child at a young age to the doctrines of religion, at a time where the child is not interested in them or capable of apprehending them. Thus, Freud notes, by the time that the child’s intellect emerges he or she is already been assailed by the doctrines of religion. What is the relative merit of closing off a mind by threats of hell-fire? Freud writes:

    When a man has once brought himself to accept uncritically all the absurdities that religious doctrines put before him and even to overlook the contradictions between them, we need not be greatly surprised at the weakness of his intellect. But we have no other means of controlling our instinctual nature than by intelligence. How can we expect people who are under the dominance of prohibitions of thought attain the psychological ideal, the primacy of the intelligence?

    http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/gthursby/fonda/freud21.html

    I dont believe, simply because it does not exist in the natural/real world of which I reside in.

    I have never attended any “Psych 101 class” however my room mate at Stanford was a Psych major and we had many a debate about this very subject.

  33. ‘Folie a deux’ which you refer to as MASS HYSTERIA, it’s actual translation is “madness has two”. I sure wouldn’t refer to “2” as a mass.
      Again, Christianity has probably a billion members and you still believe that a ludicrous (I won’t even call it a hypothesis)idea that 1 billion people all share this same psychosis…whew! Boy, that’s got to be the biggest psychological phenomenon the history of the world has seen and I imagine will ever see.
      I venture to say that your psychiatrists/psychologists’ theories and books and whatever else they spew out won’t survive the test of time as the Word of God.
      You and I obviously think were both right. Ok, if you’re right, nothing happens. If I’m right..well, you know.

      Andrew

  34. Excuse me. “folie à plusieurs” then if that makes you feel better.
    actually closer to 2 Billion Delusional Psychotics share this same “Illusion”, psychosis.
    and another almost 2 Billion share the Delusion if Islam.
    In total 2/3 to 3/4 of the entire planet is suffering from this dangerous Mind Plague/Meme.

    Ahh yes then the usual, “if Im right you go to hell” threat….LOL

    The insanity of religion knows no bounds.

  35. Well, Andrew; peace and happiness to you.  As long as you don’t start asking the government to weave your mythology into our children’s education. grin

  36. and I can only Pity you as you stroll around afraid of your delusions in the supernatural world you have been brainwashed into.

    Im just thankful I have escaped such insanity in my life, except for those infected trying to force their Meme onto me.

    The religious Meme is quite insidious.

  37. and probably be just as dissapointed with them as I was with the Lord of the Rings, which I read when I was 14. There were just too many important parts left out of the movies, it’s the old “how to condense 10,000,000 words into 3 hrs or less thing

  38. For the record the approximate sizes of the top four belief systems is along the lines of:

    Christianity is generally on the decline in most places while Islam and the Non-Religious are both growing groups. Not that the number of adherents means much of anything other than a lot of people hold the same opinion on a particular religious viewpoint, but as long as you’re going to be trumpeting numbers I figured I may as well point out that us non-believers aren’t so far behind in the popularity race.

  39. True, although last chart I saw seems like it was even closer than that.

    Think it was 2-2.1 Billion “claiming” to be Christian.

    1.5-1.6Billion Islam.

    1.5 Billion Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist.

    about 1 Billion everything else.

    and yes Christians have been positively shrinking in numbers at least since 1990 at approx 1% per year.
    In the USA in 1990 pew polls where people claimed to be Christian was at its peak of 86%.

    in 2001 was 75% with a 2% drop in that year, going by those rates of attrition we should be between 70-72% currently.

    IF this rate continues Atheist/Agnostics would out number Christians in the not so distant future.
    We can only hope.

  40. Wow, I am truly surprised, not only that agnostic/atheist/etc. ranks at least a billion, but that Judaism “only” ranks 14 million, per that website.  Whenever I hear/read discussions of major world religions, Judaism is always part of the “Big 5” (along with Chr, Isl, Bud, and Hin).  I don’t mean to say ag/ath should be included in that list or that Judaism isn’t significant in itself, but I dunno, I always thought Judaism was much more prevalent.

    While we’re playing with numbers and belief systems:

    Population of the world, June 2005 (per Wikipedia:
    6.45 billion
    Number of Christians:
    2.1 billion
    Number of non-Christians:
    4.35 billion

    So next time anyone gives you that “2 billion people can’t be wrong” argument …

    —Joe wink

  41. Yeah I’ve used that exact argument before.

    “Christian says: 2 Billion people cant be wrong”

    Then using that logic 4.5 Billion must be twice as right as being Christian you are clearly in the minority.

    Christian starts waving the old magic wand frantically to compensate.

  42. Andrew is one of those believers who consider himself most special. It’s an ego thing. He was chosen and we must give him the respect he craves.

    According to him, no matter how desperately we seek to know God, it will never happen unless God wishes it to; unless he chooses US.

    If God chooses to show Himself and change you, He will. If He doesn’t, He won’t. That’s all I can really say to break any discussion or theory down to a simplistic, final denominator.

    So, my next question has to be whether God has ever chosen someone who didn’t want to be chosen? If the crux of the matter is that he chooses independently of one’s desire to be saved then he must not care what an individual wants but only cares for what he wants.

    You either believe or you don’t believe.
    Funny though that you or others would think that Christianity, (having the most believers of all the major religions of the world)it’s members (were talking about millions upon millions here) all suffer from some kind of psychosis or some other psycho-babble theory that man has devised to feel comfortble about being a sinner.

    Belief should be based on reasonable suppositions and discernible facts . You give no good reasons to believe and therefore should be perceived as delusional. You can’t use the numbers claim because within the greater Christianity group there are many divergent beliefs, such that one person’s core beliefs are deal-breakers to others. Each of you believes slightly differently so there is no universal agreement. And throwing the sinner label around is just pathetic. You have no authority to name another’s sins even if you think you are specially chosen to do so.

    Mostly Andrew, I’m curious how you can be certain you are saved. You claim bragging rights but where is your proof? I bet you can think of several people you consider misled who say they are saved. They no doubt think you are confused too, and these are members within your own organization.

    It is unfair of me to challenge you if what you believe harms no one but I think beliefs like yours harm many. If nothing else you are egotistically furthering a dangerous meme; one that seeks to devalue human worth and curiosity.

    You might be wrong, and that to me is what’s most important about this discussion. Yourself, and those somewhat like you, might be wrong.

  43. Brock notes: Andrew is one of those believers who consider himself most special. It’s an ego thing. He was chosen and we must give him the respect he craves.

    You beat me to it – this is *exactly* what I thought as well.

    The truth of the matter is that Andrew is the kind of person no one wants to hang out with *anyway* – he just hasn’t understood that simple concept. Yet. 

    Consider his own admissions – he was into all kinds of immoral behavior, “partying” and “whoring” and whatnot.  He got married because he “had to”, and then – surprise surprise – divorced several years later.  This is not the sort of person *I* would care to associate with, and certainly isn’t the sort most of us choose to hang around with once we grow up and start behaving like adults.

    To his credit, Andrew *realized* that he was an asshole – but by reaching out for yet another crutch (religion), he’s still not getting the fact that people just don’t really want to hang out with assholes. Whether they’re druggie/alcoholic assholes or bible-thumping assholes really isn’t important – it’s the “asshole” part that’s at the crux of the problem.

    Fix *that*, fella, and everything else will fall into place – fast cars, fast women, and powerful handguns will be yours.  Yewbetcha.

  44. Some people decide to change and they do.  Others need a pre-packaged change in their lives.  Andrew seems to be of the latter variety.

    I could hardly fault Andrew for not having started at the finish line – when it comes to interpersonal mistakes I’ve sure made some doozies.  But he should know that not everyone is comfortable with pre-packaged personal change.  It can start to chafe rather badly with time.

  45. Some people decide to change and they do.  Others need a pre-packaged change in their lives.  Andrew seems to be of the latter variety.

    Yes, and some people seek that change because they wish to survive or at least be happy and they know their current lifestyles IE drugs, whoring, unhappy marriages etc, promise misery and possibly even death.

    Does this sound, in any way, like what Christianity preys on? Hint: The promise of happiness and survival. Christianity creates a fake threat and then provides a one of a kind solution. In other words, it’s simply humankind’s worst fears laid bare and then solved.

    If you want to control someone’s thoughts and actions, first you have to convince them that they are imperfectly made. You tell them they are natural sinners, carnal weaklings that are doomed, unless… You convince them that they are dependent upon a greater power for their ultimate survival and to save them from eternal suffering.

    Then you sit back and collect the guilt/buy off money.

    OK, on to the next mind game and the best way to solve it >>>

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.