HOME | DD
kevinsano — Superbook
Published: 2011-03-15 20:24:18 +0000 UTC; Views: 6477; Favourites: 108; Downloads: 202
Redirect to original
Description
I am unsure how to react to this new Superbook thing :/Related content
Comments: 40
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I watched the new one, and it seems to be a little more in detail, which is good.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I remember growing up watching the classic Superbook & Flying House.
I'm not so sure about the new Superbook either. I would need to watch it. I'm not too crazy about the character designs that they chose for the main characters.
Maybe the creators will make changes along the way - depending how far the new Superbook series would go.
I did see an earlier version of Joy that looked somewhat similar to the classic design or color scheme. I'm not sure which one. I found it on Facebook but I don't remember where on Facebook.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 1 ⏩: 0
Yes, the old one. The new one is an American CGI series.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Then technically it's not anime. Crap.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I think that the best way to react to something so ludicrous is with hysterical laughter.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
same here pal. I didn't like this Joy.
No offense, Kevinsano? Your drawing of her is better than in CGI, though.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I didn't mean laughing at this piece specifically, I meant laughing at Superbook in general. I mean, a fun adventure cartoon about children experiencing Bible stories first hand is ridiculous.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I've actually never seen Superbook, but I think that the concept alone is hilarious because the Bible is definitely not age appropriate reading material for children.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There are a couple of reasons for me to say that the Bible is not appropriate for children. The first seems to me to be pretty obvious, and that is that so many of the Bible stories are filled with extreme violence and explicit sex. If the Bible were a movie, it would probably be rated NC-17, considering of course that they didn't abridge it at all like they usually do whenever they make a movie based on a Bible story. As an example, in the Dreamworks film, "The Prince of Egypt" there is no mention, at least not that I recall, of the Pharaoh's heart being hardened by God so that he won't free the Hebrew slaves. And that example brings me to the other reason why I think that the Bible isn't appropriate for Children, the Bible promotes horrendous atrocities as divine morality. Jesus said in Matthew chapter 19 that there is none good but God, but let's look at God's track record: He punished Adam and Eve for having the curiosity that he gave them, he "punished" Cain for murdering his brother by giving him a mark that would ensure that he is never harmed, ordered genocide against several tribes of people, personally committed genocide against the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah as well as the entire world save for eight people, commanded filicide of Abraham and also of Jephthah, set down laws that persecute women and gays, set down laws that allow the keeping, beating, and killing of slaves, personally murdered all of the first born sons of the Egyptians because he felt like it, had bears kill 42 children for making fun of one of his prophets, and probably a bunch of things that I can't think of off the top of my head. A good person wouldn't perform any of these acts, let alone all of them. The morality of the Bible is clearly skewed in a terrible direction, this is not a morality that we should be teaching children.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
He punished Adam and Eve for having the curiosity that he gave them...
Argument by outrage. There were rules laid down and they broke them. Perhaps the Pentagon won't punish you for walking around in their weapons labs... you were just curious about it!
...he "punished" Cain for murdering his brother by giving him a mark that would ensure that he is never harmed...
Which was a _very_ slow death sentence... especially in a time where corporate survival was key to living.
...ordered genocide against several tribes of people...
Might I ask what the cultures of such tribes were like? Like, did they sacrifice children or practice bestiality?
...personally committed genocide against the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah as well as the entire world save for eight people...
More outrage! youtu.be/fbBHj2WF7u0?t=4m40s
...commanded filicide of Abraham...
Keep in mind that God repeatedly said that Isaac was to be his heir. Abraham assumed that if God wouldn't stop him, He would Isaac after all was said and done. People in those times were surrounded by disease and death, you've been spoiled by your 21st Century life with air conditioning and gas stations on every street corner.
...and also of Jephthah...
The Torah gave specifics about burnt offerings: no humans and no females. These were made for forgiveness, not to give thanks. Therefore, his daughter was not literally sacrificed. You're reading it like a fundy.
...set down laws that persecute women and gays...
www.tektonics.org/film/paulhat…
www.tektonics.org/lp/lev18.php
www.tektonics.org/qt/romhom.ph…
...set down laws that allow the keeping, beating, and killing of slaves...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6FkCJ…
...personally murdered all of the first born sons of the Egyptians because he felt like it...
Corporate responsibility. The cause of this plague, ultimately, was back when the Egyptians killed the firstborn male Jewish babies.
Here is a scholarly analysis: christianthinktank.com/killhei…
...had bears kill 42 children for making fun of one of his prophets...
42 children? More like 42 adolescent hoodlums, based on the original manuscripts!
youtu.be/MgkMJhcTE1c?t=2m15s
A good person wouldn't perform any of these acts, let alone all of them. The morality of the Bible is clearly skewed in a terrible direction, this is not a morality that we should be teaching children.
Spoken like a pampered 21st-Century whiner. No sense of the justice of God and attempting to force human psychology on a non-human. Pure folly.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Your retorts to my criticisms of biblical morality are vile and dishonest.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What's the matter? I wouldn't get down on the ground let you walk all over me?
Your idea of a reputable response is a white flag and you're upset because I brought data into this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What are you even talking about? How could I be trying to walk all over you when you came to me with your trashy excuses for the Bible? And you didn't bring data anywhere. You chastised me for "argument by outrage," because of the umbrage I take with the punishment of Adam and Eve, yet punishing someone for committing a crime which the punisher went out of his way to ensure that the person who performed the infraction could not understand that his or her action was a crime is outrageous. Your comparison to the Pentagon's weapons labs is ludicrous simply because the Pentagon has gone out of its way to inform me that I'm not to be there and why I'm not to be there. Your comment that Cain received a slow death sentence for murdering Abel simply proves that you've never once read the Bible. Cain goes on to live a full life in another tribe, even finding a wife and building a family. You failed to justify the many genocides described in the Old Testament by suggesting that the murdered tribes were zoophilic child murderers, yet that notion is not Biblical. The Bible explicitly states that these conquests were for territory and plunder, and furthermore it wouldn't matter in the slightest if there were zoophiles and child killers amongst the destroyed peoples. You cannot justify the murder of a child by invoking the sexual proclivities or religious practices of his or her neighbors. You cannot possibly be unaware of this fact. You are lying in service of your faith. You also lie about Abraham and Jephtha by bringing up the rules on sacrificing animals for repentance which is not what was demanded of these two men. They were told to kill their kids to curry favor with Yahweh. And Jephtha actually went through with it. Describing the Bible accurately isn't the behavior of a fundie. It's the behavior of an honest person. Concerning this "corporate responsibility" nonsense, everyone is responsible for their own actions regardless of what provoked them. The Egyptian authorities were responsible for the murders they committed, not the ones committed against their babies. Why are there so many scenarios in which you are in favor of the murder of children? Even if they are hoodlums it's still wrong to murder people. I didn't bother with any of the links you posted because they are almost certainly of a similar caliber to the arguments you presented to me yourself and I can only consume so much horse shit in one sitting. I just hope that you now understand why I found your retorts so disgusting.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What are you even talking about? How could I be trying to walk all over you when you came to me with your trashy excuses for the Bible?
Excuse me, but this guy did a Christian-based pic and when you took note of that, you waltzed over to stretch out your butt on it.
Am I lying? comments.deviantart.com/1/2010…
And you didn't bring data anywhere. You chastised me for "argument by outrage," because of the umbrage I take with the punishment of Adam and Eve, yet punishing someone for committing a crime which the punisher went out of his way to ensure that the person who performed the infraction could not understand that his or her action was a crime is outrageous.
Oh, I guess all those links and stuff were imaginary, then.
I didn't bother with any of the links you posted because they are almost certainly of a similar caliber to the arguments you presented to me yourself and I can only consume so much horse shit in one sitting.
Oh... spoken like a garden variety fundy atheist pig: terrified crapless that someone will defend his/her faith.
Also, what's so in comprehensible about "Do not eat from this tree"?
Your comparison to the Pentagon's weapons labs is ludicrous simply because the Pentagon has gone out of its way to inform me that I'm not to be there and why I'm not to be there.
Which is what God did.
Your comment that Cain received a slow death sentence for murdering Abel simply proves that you've never once read the Bible. Cain goes on to live a full life in another tribe, even finding a wife and building a family.
And where would he get the food to survive? "When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you." Keep in mind that building a city is not the same as eating.
You failed to justify the many genocides described in the Old Testament by suggesting that the murdered tribes were zoophilic child murderers, yet that notion is not Biblical. The Bible explicitly states that these conquests were for territory and plunder, and furthermore it wouldn't matter in the slightest if there were zoophiles and child killers amongst the destroyed peoples. You cannot justify the murder of a child by invoking the sexual proclivities or religious practices of his or her neighbors. You cannot possibly be unaware of this fact. You are lying in service of your faith.
Ancient warfare, Burnt Toast. You've got a lot of reading to do: christianthinktank.com/qamorit…
You also lie about Abraham...
Am I? www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP0E87…
...and Jephtha by bringing up the rules on sacrificing animals for repentance which is not what was demanded of these two men. They were told to kill their kids to curry favor with Yahweh. And Jephtha actually went through with it.
From christianthinktank.com/fem02c.… :
Most commentators believe that Jephthah literally killed and burned his daughter on an altar somewhere, and that this human sacrifice was condoned by God (since it was a vow thing). It seems to me that this is probably NOT the case--there are just two many incongruities in the text/context for that. Consider:
1. Literal "burnt offerings" HAD TO BE male (Lev 22.18-19). Jephthah's daughter obviously wasn't.
2. What did Jeff THINK would come out of a house? Not animals! He must have known that only a human would have come out.
3. Human sacrifice was STRICTLY forbidden (Dt 12.31) and we have NO record of it being practiced (even in horrible Judges-period Israel) by mainstream Israel during this period.
4. The lament for the daughter is about 'not marrying' NOT about 'not living'--it makes me wonder if some kind of religious celibacy is not in view. (Maybe the women at the Entrance to the Tent were celibate--Ex 38.8--living as widows in Israel later did on Temple payrolls.)
5. Verse 39 calls his action a 'vow'. Lev 27.28 (coupled with 27.21) allowed people to be given over the Lord, who became servants of the Priests. As devoted to the Lord's service, some of them probably did NOT marry (cf. the Nazarite vow, in its restriction on becoming 'unclean' for family members (Num 6.7) omits the words 'husband' or 'wife'...perhaps it was sometimes involving celibacy. The only Nazies we know, though, were married--Samuel and Samson)
6. As the only child, and if given to the priest in this fashion, Jephthah's entire estate would go to someone else.
7. We have the VERY parallel case of Hannah and Samuel. She takes a vow, and offers her son to the Lord for all his life. (I Sam 1-2), and such vows did NOT allow the person to be redeemed with money (Lev 27.28-29).
8. Burnt offerings were ALWAYS associated with condemnation/evil--not thanksgiving and vows. Even the one non-literal use of it in Dt 13.16 (in which a town is offered as a burnt offering) involves abject judgment/condemnation--NOT at all in view in the Jephthah passage.
9. He would have had to offer her at some cultic site, which would have had a priest. I cannot imagine a priest (even those as lax as elsewhere in the book of Judges) that would have agreed to perform a human sacrifice!
What I have to conclude from this passage is that Jephthah is using 'burnt offering' in a general 'offering' sense, and that he is meaning an 'irredeemable vow' as a thank-offering, along the line of Hannah/Samuel. This is the only way to make sense of all the particulars. (Interestingly, Jephthat is surprisingly literate—his knowledge of biblical history,evidenced in the letter to his adversary, shows that he knows the mosaic history—he WOULD have known how bad a literal human sacrifice would have been.)
recent book by Pamela Reis [OT:RTL] adds some interesting insights to this event:
1. Jeff's vow would have been taken in the town he lived in, and would have been publically known to all—including his daughter
2. The daughter has all the appearances of a 'spoiled' child, flaunter her power over her dad;
3. The daughter has all the appearances of a “paganite” in the passage!
4. Giving the daughter over to God (as I suggested above) might have forced her to remain unmarried (since she could have done no housewifely work as dedicated to the Lord). This would have forced her (in her understanding) to remain in her father's house (instead of at the tabernacle, as I postulated above).
5. Jephthah's vow is accordingly 'not rash'--he probably expected a male servant to come out deliberately—as an advancement to the cultic life.
The net effect of her understanding is the same: there was no human sacrifice, nor any devaluation of women in the passage.
"Describing the Bible accurately isn't the behavior of a fundie. It's the behavior of an honest person."
You're just doing a plain-text reading: typical of fundies. The Bible was written in a high-context society: they had a lot of stuff that would be lost on idiots like you. Not only that, but it wasn't written in English.
You aren't going to find anything on how to speak Hebrew or Greek in the Bible. You have to go beyond.
Concerning this "corporate responsibility" nonsense, everyone is responsible for their own actions regardless of what provoked them.
I guess Mara Bar-Serapion was out of line blaming all of Athens for Socrates' death and Samos for Pythagoras' death.
The Egyptian authorities were responsible for the murders they committed, not the ones committed against their babies. Why are there so many scenarios in which you are in favor of the murder of children? Even if they are hoodlums it's still wrong to murder people.
Ah, argument by outrage: a hallmark tactic of Bob Ingersoll. I really doubt if you, Toasty, would be concerned about the Egyptian firstborn children or even their livestock. In the ancient Near East, as stated before, there was a lot of disease and death. So when you bring up narratives of babies or livestock dying wouldn't have scarred anyone.
I just hope that you now understand why I found your retorts so disgusting.
You only found them disgusting because someone had the balls to fight back. Pigs, such as yourself, cannot bear to see anything being used to attack anti-Christian sentiment. You just want a safe target to drag your butt across.
Surrender.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The 2009 opening sequence "A Giant Adventure" showed panty shots of this character. Talk about getting crap past radar ...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Seriously? That's just... lolwut
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wasn't "Superbook" the campaign from the late '80s or early '90s?
Well, she's very cute and you got the conservative attire right. I like what you did with her hair and the emphasis on her quick turn. The expectant yet almost smug look seems about right.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wait.... Someone's remaking/reimagining/whatever Superbook? That old anime where children entered a Bible and lived through the stories in it to learn about Chrisitanity? I haven't even seen the original!
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0