Beauty And The Beast
A study in our
gender typology
- Part Three -
Post 250
This may indeed be my most volatile post yet. If read correctly it will terrify you to suddenly come face to face with a very clear mirror able to plainly show the reflection that has been long hidden from view…even to yourself. This is not about blame or fault; it’s about exposing the unrecognized cancer that needs to be cut out at all cost and expediency if we are to save the patient...You. I post this material in trepidation because it branches out into very risky territory on
many fronts. Primarily that I am departing from a direct exposition on the very scriptures themselves and am here projecting those expositions onto things declared to be disconnected from them. I openly recognize that this is simply one opinion among many possible interpretations and yet boldly propose that this interpretation is correct. I am not sourcing ANY thoughts here but those who are not familiar with the sources will quickly accuse me of creating
theology from fairytales. This is not so. By knowing God’s ancient theology of scripture I am showing how it applies in virtually every area of life, even our “innocent” animations we plop our children in front of to keep them quiet for an hour.
Before we begin let’s outline the approach we will use to explore this fairytale.
Design Parameters:
There are three main ways to view any information transfer; these are identified as perspectives. To determine that only one exists, is to remain ignorant of the other two but this does not cause their existence to cease. These basic perspectives are as follows:
Meaningless accident: This view declares the information is innocuous and has no intrinsic value though it can appear to in some small way, and to apply a specific meaning is an error. This is the spirit of Evolution that we have already accepted as a society. To accept this perspective eliminates the other two from our options, but does not revoke their potential reality.
Direct and simple purpose: This view applies the information in the most obvious and specifically limited way. “This screw goes here” as opposed to; “Any screw of this specification goes in any hole with the accommodating specifications.”
Specific principle with general application: This view is the most complex to understand but also has the greatest potential in easy application. Instead of packing and sorting through a bag of a thousand screws looking for “The one that goes here.” We can understand that while specific specification is critical, each specific screw Type can be applied in many places. This allows us to pack fewer various screws and apply from the few we pack to every area of many applications/needs.
The following fairytale easily offers us the second view which is regarding relationships between men and women, and while it might be accurate to apply it so, do not reject the reality that the third application has far more value in a hole that does not have a sign saying; “This screw goes here”.
Now while the ignorant see a hole and declare that nearly any screw of that size and length can apply and therefore the apparent meaning is more probably random accident, the informed technician knows that there are other factors to consider, such as; diameter, length, thread count, shank, composition, tensile strength, head configuration, coating, etc. So with more knowledge and information, the rejection of all but the right one for the job declares; “This screw goes here” without the specific “tag” of perspective number two.
Your job is not to accept or reject my 3rd perspective as the only one, but to inspect the detailed requirements to determine if I have applied this screw to a hole with all the accommodating specifics.
In short: I am submitting my specific application of these fairytales to the scientific
empirical (*1) method of testing theories, even applying Shannon’s Verifiable Definition of Meaning, which states: “Untestable statements are meaningless.”
“The great tragedy of science: [is] the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact” - Huxley.
In otherwords; have I forced this application or does it fit like a tailored glove? If the hand I am fitting has four fingers and a thumb but my glove has five fingers, you can reject my theoretical application as foolish and or poorly fabricated. Or if the hand is a small but my glove is a large, you can again reject my theoretical application as perhaps close, but not fitting. In this way, the probability that my particular application is incorrect is quite high, and most probable to be shown a failure. But if my application shows the work of a worthy tailor that has custom made this specific glove for this specific hand, you must be prepared to acknowledge this truth because rejection is to avoid the valuable result. But here is where it gets complex;
If you think the application is for club dancing but I provide a welding-glove, you may reject my application as inappropriate, but who actually ordered the gloves? This is a far greater issue in America today because Cinderella has become Proactive in making the orders, as opposed to her earlier state of
Reactive in letting her prince order the gloves.
So to avoid a fight with the delivery boy, I ask you to simply ignore the application of desire and focus only on the fit. You may not like the thought of welding, but you didn’t order these gloves.
* * *
So let’s get started with the fitting:
Whatever you conclude, do not imagine I find the 1991 Disney animated movie Beauty and the Beast poorly made. The songs and score, the animation and voices, the story and delivery, all are top-notch works that the creators can be highly proud of. This is a very impressive work and by its wonderful enchantment successfully bonds our heart to Belle and therefore her circumstances in which she finds herself; love of the Beast.
As a long awaited installment in the “princess” theme we are to expect the same specific Type elements as the original keystone 1950 Cinderella, and we are not disappointed. But having grown up with the “new theme” progression of the princess mentality until Disney's 1989 The Little Mermaid, it has become natural for a whole generation of girls to accept that the princess is the one who actually saves the prince now days (*2). The present adult generation does not see the obvious; that instead of a selfless heart quietly enduring her troubles till rescued by her prince (II Thessalonians 3:5), Belle is not a captive, or servant, or even abused, she is simply dissatisfied with her hometown because she sees it as tiresome, backward and boring, resorting to escapism through specifically, books of exciting fantasy. This is a good representation of dissatisfied free America today.
And now instead of “her evil authority” being jealous of her beautiful nature, we see right off, by a whole segment and song, that by Belle’s well intended but “better than thou” troubled heart of discontented vanity (*3) the entire town, as her democratic equals of hard working good citizens trying happily to make an “honest” living (with small signs of their own comparatively minor hypocrisies), views her as “strange” and “odd”, not fitting in, and now includes in “odd” her unusual physical beauty that is not seen as representing anything but its vain self; Is that her head in the clouds or just her nose in the air? The only real difference is the conscious awareness of heart that produces the act. But in her pleasant and beautiful youth, even the townsfolk cannot specifically identify her flaw:
“Now it’s no wonder that her name means “beauty”,
her looks have got no parallel,
but behind the fair facade,
I’m afraid she’s rather odd,
very different from the rest of us,
she’s nothing like the rest of us,
yes different from the rest of us is Belle.” (*14).
Yet as viewers from the outside we can still see the spiritual connection, as both her easy to accept “better than thou” nature of ignorant youth, and her vain but still appealing physical beauty, are considered mutually vain: The inward still creates the outward.
The animators have specifically stated in interview that to promote this princess as Proactive instead of her predecessors being Reactive, her opening song is operatic to show her greater cultural pursuits in contrast to the simple town. And without trying to find fault in this girl, The entire nature of our princess has changed, but so has our perspective of what makes her beautiful. Yet that truth is hidden behind our years of instructional experience that recognizes her “familiar princessly” warm and pleasant positive-heart and appealing physical beauty, which we now focus on as encompassing everything that means “princess” (; i.e. worthy of the prince; i.e. Christian to Christ), while absent the very spirit of the foundational Princesses.
I confess I like this girl too and she is indeed a very accurate image of “good Christian
Yin girls today”… when compared to bad Yang girls (Post 193). But as in the reality it represents; the seeds of the whole trouble in the story are already sewn in the first scene, and those seeds are properly ignored by her enchanting presentation; “…love covereth all sins” Proverbs 10:12 (also I Peter 4:8), and we love her.
And by the end of Gaston’s unapologetic sexually driven song-and-animation of both their beauties, we have already fallen into the trap of confusion: Through the song we find the obvious but unpleasant answer to her thoughts that “there must be more than this provincial life”, is to
say “Yes” to the beautiful man who wants to marry her for her beauty: He is undisputedly the best hunter, strongest, and perfectly handsome, the overwhelming hero of the town; obviously the best at virtually everything… But there is a problem; he knows it and is disgustingly proud and vapid (*5) and as a result is not too bright, slow to recognize Belle’s larger awareness of the possibilities beyond him.
We understand that the whole town is in favor of this match. In fact, just to make sure we don’t miss this important point, Gaston informs us that the town’s concerns are that “it’s not right for a woman to read, soon she starts getting ideas; thinking…”
Our Belle is deeper than that- and so are we- so we readily agree with her to look for something more to take her away from all this “little people” drivel and “primeval” thinking, (which “educated conclusion” is the result of just such “reading ideas and thinking” in the perspective of her imagination encouraged by fantasies such as Evolution and such). How did we come to this agreement with her? The story carefully led us here, and we went willingly because of the chain of reasoning from our childhood that all the previous fairytales led us through to arrive here intentionally like sheep to the slaughter.
The trap that we have already sprung is
firstly; that her town is
“unacceptably” backward and archaic, and secondly that there are only the two choices presented to her; One is her perception of the “conceited” man of the backward town, and the other we have not yet seen but anticipate as exciting;
Egyptian uprising anyone? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16716089).
We, like Belle, are now well primed to accept whatever comes, as “better” because we let someone else tell us what to believe; i.e. the animator’s/
Berkeley’s (*6) view of reality.
Is her town provincial like she says? (*7). Well yes, but does that mean the whole town and its values are rightly worth tossing over for “whatever” comes next? Without even contemplating it- because the answer appears obvious- like the Egyptians, we all quickly answer; "Yes".
The whole nature of this animation is entirely different than that of Cinderella. Now Good and Evil are no longer simple to distinguish as before, though if we refuse to think about it, it seems quite obvious which-is-which without all the brain hurting effort. So now we have a disagreement regarding what we each perceive as obvious; I, because I search out the true distinction, and you because you don’t care to. Therefore, as a citizen of this “provincial town” I struggle to open "Belle’s" eyes of understanding, but her heart is already gone and she brushes me off as another of the boorish townsmen she thinks is “small.” And I can’t really blame her; the town does have its narrow problems that create compromise of corruption, but that’s all she cares to see. And as she metaphorically wanders out of town, the townspeople “mourn” her departing from the common Christian faith:
“Look there she goes, a girl who’s strange but special,
A most peculiar mad’moiselle,
It’s a pity and a sin,
she doesn’t quite fit in,
‘Cause she really is a funny girl,
A beauty but a funny girl,
She really is a funny girl that Belle.” (*14)
The town’s people see what I see, and what Gaston sees; She really is adorable with her youthful creative mind to believe there should be more than what she sees, but she is lacking grounding and needing basic direction for her own good. I will not here address her following conversation with Gaston, but will later send you back to view
every word and action of it, with different eyes (ears of understanding).
* * *
Setting The Stage:
Next we see her loving father is also an “odd” character, but a “typical man” who can’t read a map and is not as alert as his horse, but then blames his horse when things go wrong; having forced his will over it’s better discernment three times (the second time is an easy to miss resisting jerk of the reigns). I can’t help but think of Balaam and his donkey (Numbers 22:21-33) but this is a direct pointed complaint against Israel not recognizing her troubles are due to choosing the “Gastonless” (as later distinguished from christless *8) path while believing your goals are righteous. This father seems far from Cinderella’s, who was simply said to have died.
Obviously there is no doubt that Belle is still representing Christian/humanity just as Cinderella did, and her father in Type is still Adam, whose sin and resulting death put his girl in trouble under and evil and oppressive authority, but Belle’s lack of protection no longer appears to be a thing divinely determined by the narrative but rather a thing of his own doing. This is not immediately a significant point as both views are understood in the concept that her father is Adam/Israel and his original sin resulting in death is what puts us all in jeopardy without his sinless protection. But the focus of Free Will or Divine Determination decides the entire perspective in which the event, and therefore the message, is viewed. Neither view is actually incorrect but the choice of view is nonetheless important to interpretation within that view; (Post 277 “
Particle or Wave?” http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2012/11/particle-or-wave.html). Trouble comes when we
cross interpret what we see, with the wrong perspective used, (*13.12).
Instead of simply stating; “he died,” and move on with the story as before, now we follow him in his adventure of error (sin), and for the first time we see a strange thing: No longer do the “magical” animals-and-items remain disconnected from the reality of the story so that they can represent the unseen angelic spiritual world of supernatural activity, no, now this man is puzzled at these seeming ordinary items actually interacting with him miraculously in his human reality where that isn't done. We have crossed that unwritten boundary line between worlds where he is curiously interested in the now direct workings of un-natural beings in our realm, even if they still appear to inhabit common forms. Simplistically this is often explained as possession vs. influence, but that doesn’t quite do it justice. Rather a more proper analogy would be Entity itself in temporal form vs. possession of something already existing. In the later “advanced view” animation of Shrek, this “Enchanted” direct interaction of things presumed as “naturel” in that animation, was revealed as: “Possessed Toys,” when confronted by humans. But even that divided view still hides the actual truth that will not be revealed until an even more advanced view/perspective of the supernatural in the flesh co-existing with humanity. Watch for this in upcoming Princess stories.
And now in this Cinderella state of abandonment by her father, poor Belle is not just patiently waiting her rescuing prince (James 5:7-8, I Timothy 6:1 ouch!); she is forced to fend off the offers of a revolting “boorish, brainless” prince-wannabe (shutter). And while Christians everywhere immediately see Gaston as a representation of the unlikeable Antichrist (I John 2:18) we know this probably cannot be him since we see what comes later is a monster not a Christ. So; “Who does Gaston represent?” And since were asking; “Who does the Beast represent?”
Well that’s not hard to see: IF we accept that the Demonic Spirit is telling this tale; then obviously Christ is going to be shown as a monster, and so Gaston, who came first, is obviously the Antichrist.
You think? (said wryly).
After having refused Gaston’s proposal, wanting “more than I can tell…adventure in the great wide somewhere”, she is immediately presented exactly that; Belle “is forced” by circumstances to find her captive father and we dramatically and plainly see that Belle the female (Type of humanity) is now the human Savior (ultimately of the Beast) who willingly sacrifices herself for her father (Israel) and in so doing is now forever the agreed captive of the Beast.
But who is the Beast to whom she makes the deal? It all seems so confusing, or more probably; I am just forcing the Type onto this particular unrelated animation story.
But wait and see.
* * *
Belle's World is Dramatically Changed:
Now finally after all the prep, the animation comes to the main body and the animator’s stated intent of the story, and we begin to see the troubled Beast is really wanting- and needing- to be loved, but does not know how to go about it, presumably like typical teen-age boys (a dangerous cross-view application intended and absorbed by both your sons and your daughters). And like Belle, by familiarity, our heart begins to go out to the beast and we see that indeed he needs to be loved and that Belle can heal his angry violent heart with her love. Isn’t that wonderful. (am I too wry yet?).
Now since we have completely messed up the Type, why not send the charming girl to Hunger for the only place forbidden in the whole garden…er…castle (the West Wing “forbidden tree” if you will). Her curiosity is indeed shamefully, but apparently not remorsefully, uncontrollable. Remind you of anyone? I guess the apple really doesn’t fall very far from the tree.
So what was the great Beast prince keeping from her? The awareness of who the prince is as opposed to who he appears to be; in otherwords, Bell’s limited human knowledge of good and evil… within the “more than human” prince himself, from a very twisted perspective of this severely scoliosed story (Colossians 2:18-19). The condition of the West Wing shows the true nature of the Beast (even being a hidden man with that same violent Beast nature), while the “public presentation” areas of the castle show a complex deception of something else identified to her as "an internal struggle” that he can't win without her.
The Beast gets violently angry at finding her in the forbidden West Wing and so at his command to “get out”, she breaks her promise to stay and runs from the castle where she gets into serious trouble by wolves (demonic servants of the Beast), and the Beast comes to rescue her at his own peril (a classic staged ploy of sex slave owners winning the hearts of their target). And now we dramatically see her conflicted heart in the confusing circumstances showing the compassionate side of her captor who has “grown to love her this much”;
"If he is the Christ then of course we should help him when he needs our help, but if he is not the Christ, he still has a good side and is hurt because of us."
And indeed this pulls at the natural nurturing heartstrings of a woman, which is what makes them predictably easy prey.
By the “forbidden fruit,” then the “expulsion from the castle/garden,” then a “rescue to prove his love”; the Beast seems indeed to be the Type of the Christ, which apparently makes Gaston the Antichrist as we suspected. And so we are confident that we are to love the Beast as Christ, even if it doesn’t completely make sense yet, we know it will in the end because we already know this story from Sunday-School, and as a popular phrase puts it; “If it hasn’t worked out yet, it’s not the end.” - paraphrased from Mrs. Potts.
“Besides, it’s just an animation, so we can give it a bit of room for artistic license of a story we already know,” Right? What kind of ridiculous foolishness am I concocting here? Clearly I have the meaning of this harmless fairytale all wrong! You must be thinking;
“Just shut up and let us enjoy the meaningless story.”
But give me just a bit longer:
* * *
A New Kind of Romance:
As the budding romance develops we are suddenly informed that the magical items are not angelics but actually enchanted humans that need Belle’s love of the Beast to transform them all. Is it possible that these “people” are possessed of demons to make them what they are not, and this possession is what her love of the Beast is theoretically supposed to break, thus transforming them back into free people? It sure seems this perspective is intended, but let’s work this idea a bit:
“Tale as old as time,
song as old as rhyme,
beauty and the beast” (*14)
Doesn’t this song inform us that this IS the same old Type as the one from the beginning and that we are supposed to interpret that old biblical Type with these new glasses? Christ is the monster that drove Satan and his “people”/Adam and Eve from Heaven/Garden once they discovered his true nature, but because he discovered he loves us and was injured to save us, we can tame his anger with our wonderful humanity and make him complete, thereby transforming the world. This is a very telling statement of a significant sprouting worldview that we will not develop until a later post. This is a very telling statement of a significant sprouting worldview that we will not develop here. I actually fear publishing such statements of confusion because its pervasive poison is so toxic it will bring confusion to the spiritually weak believers. I am simply making you/them aware of the poison that is already being fed you, you just don’t know it yet. And now you can begin to see the exquisitely complex twisting that takes long explanations to unwind.
In the meantime what does the Beast use to warm human Belle’s heart to him? Her love of fantasy, in books like;
Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings, and Twilight, as he gives her unrestricted access to his entire library. In this way she feels completely free to “investigate” any truth she wants and come to her own conclusions, but it was not declared that this library is meticulously free of any books with an opposing view. (I have in my library a Qur'an for open investigation of both views, do Muslims have Bibles in theirs?) The cards are stacked against her but the illusion is that she has available all information, and by her specific apatite for fantasy/imagination, she will never discover this truth. This is what Gaston tried to tell her when he was looking through her book and declared; “There’s no pictures.”
While the animators have told us they specifically intended the point that he was looking for a “centerfold”, this does not destroy but rather actually enhances the spiritual message; that he was challenging her book to show some sound reflection of reality. But her reply is that in these books of fantasy “you have to use your imagination” because there is no reflection of reality unless you do. As I have said,
by their own declaration that she loves to read fantasy, her books are all those philosophies and sciences and religions that do not have accurate representations of reality, but rather re-invent reality to be whatever the mind imagines. This is America today as we have abandon science and replaced it with quasi-science in the plethora of spiritually new TV programs like Through the Wormhole with Morgan Freeman, (http://science.discovery.com/tv/through-the-wormhole/) using very small fragments of actual science “too big for us viewers,” to then conjecture for us the fantasy we desire, having little means to prove it wrong. This is also the reflection of Modern Christianity as they excessively worry isolated fragments of “deep” scripture to make it say anything that we want. In essence Gaston was saying; “Show me a real image of a real woman/Christian in your books, undressed by the beautiful trappings of illusion, and from there we can discover what is true by comparing it to reality.”
But there are none.
Yet instead of “snapping out of it” as he, Gaston/Christ, presents himself as the real life replacement of her fantasy, she doesn’t get the point and grovels in the mud to recover her precious fantasy of faith much as Christian young women today read Romance Novels, and ignore the young “primeval” real men searching for a wife.
Again, this is not isolated to gender, as all Christians are potentially represented by Belle in their self-absorbed pursuits, and men do the same thing with porn as the everyday real woman can’t measure up to their unrealistic fantasy either. This is a human problem. But that problem only becomes clear when we add the knowledge of the “alternative” to the mix.
* * *
Don't Hurt The Beast!
Eventually circumstances of the story find us at the “Gaston sponsored” public consensus of the town; that the beast must be killed. But of course these are those same simple fools and ignorant backward people she was rescued from by the Beast who enslaved her. And as she said; “he’s no monster Gaston, you are… he’s my friend.”
Gaston’s reply? “If you’re not with us, you’re against us” (a reversal of Luke 9:50 rather than the Luke 11:17-18 meaning of the fact that she is a citizen of the town). And so he cast her with her father into the cellar (Matthew 12:30, 8:12). That wicked, heartless man; I mean how bad can the Beast be? He released her because he loved her didn’t he? “He wouldn’t hurt anyone,” she said.
And as we watch the movie it troubles us that those evil Christians would get so worked up to go lynch the poor Beast, but tell me; Who is it that has spent years telling everyone they will drive their enemies into the sea and exterminate their entire people not resting until it’s accomplished? Who is it that has declared again and again that they will take over America? Who has spread terror and blood, not just over the provincial town, but over the entire globe? The possessed people of the Beast whose eyes are full of blood, that Belle is supposed to break the enchantment with her love of their god.
Is it wrong to defend your wife and children? Oh but the movie didn’t show you that part did it? My mistake, it must not be true. The cries of the townsfolk in song concerned for their children must be entirely paranoia; after all, the possessed dishes are really very sweet... as they diligently attempt to encourage her to love their master who enslaved her in his violence of excessive self-focus to solve his internal conflict.
But remember the stained glass window at the beginning, after the prince is cursed? While the cross of Christ’s forgiveness is the herald standard on the sunshine side, the sword is the standard on the Dark side. Curious. It’s not the Jews/Christians who go about lustily murdering in mass, “burning the butler” and “raping the maid” as is uncomfortably shown graphically in this twisted animation of their long-coming response to years of the Beast’s regular plundering of their town.
And as we see the town’s people (only when under the leadership of Gaston himself: Joshua 5:13-14) storm the Beast’s kingdom behind their hero to finally end the reign of the violent monster (Mica 5:2-6, Isaiah 66:15-16), The Beast’s enchanted people are shown to successfully fight them off in defense and justifiably rid the Beast’s kingdom of the enemy. But let’s do a comparative tally; how many documented worldwide car bombs, suicide explosions, and public building destructions have the Christians/Jews done, and how many have the Muslims? How extensive of a kingdom do the Jews possess vs. that of Islam? How much land-area have the Jews, even, once won in defensive battle, given back for peace, vs. that of Islam? So is this animated presentation “telling it” like it really is, even though Christ will indeed lead his people into battle against the Beast and his kingdom in the end, when their wickedness is full? (Joel 3:13, Revelation 19:11-14). The illusion presented to the viewer is that this attack is unjust, and without an outside perspective attached to reality the viewer cannot then see it any other way. This is called brainwashing.
Example:
Where was the Beast during the battle? He was sulking in his room and would not instruct his people even when begged. Islam declares that Allah will not come until the world is covered in blood, but Christians are instructed by their scriptures that the battle is not theirs to fight, they must wait for Christ to lead them himself in his perfect wisdom:
“Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord” Romans 12:19 (see also: James 1:20, 2:13, 3:17-18).
And so in order to bring Allah’s return, his people must instigate the blood themselves while making it appear to be the townspeople’s unwarranted violence. This is an extremely important detail to distinguish love from hate and to show that God’s faithful people are not bloodthirsty and are specifically instructed to avoid such vengeance. Wisdom tells us that this denial is because of the weakness of the flesh to corrupt justice by the Hungering-for-blood that fell on all nature (including animals) at the sin of Adam (the father of all humanity). In our compromised righteousness humanity likes taking vengeance, and so it is denied to God’s people (Hosea 4:3-7) till this condition is resolved at his return (Joel 3:1-16).
Then this version of the story shows Gaston begin his presumed murderously unprovoked attack of the non-defending Beast. But along with Joel chapter 3, the Cinderella telling shows this in a different light as Lucifer the cat carefully sets up the dog to appear to Cinderella to be the aggressor. And here we come to the complex debate of bodycount on each side. While seeming to be identical, and witnessing graphically the cruel unmerciful Gaston attempt to slay the non-defending Beast, it is then very hard to see it in any other light. But. Do we ever see the accused serial killer aggressively defend himself from the Judge who sends him to the Chair? No, he is already beaten and simply waiting judgment. But is the Judge’s killing of the defenseless melancholy man, not righteous? (oh boy, this is a hard sell today.) So for now, skip the whole Anti-Capital Punishment bit and listen to the argument of merit; The Judge can rightly extinguish the life of one who does not retaliate because judgment has been determined against his past conduct. In this role, Gaston as Christ is carrying out judgment of the Beast for his long history of bloody crimes against the provincial town. But this “Defense Lawyer telling” gives us a whole different angle for the purpose of drawing us to the defendant’s side by our natural compassion:
Only 12 years later, not a single of the 99 convicted
Nuremberg felons sentenced to prison terms (*9), remained behind bars for the millions of people that they mercilessly tormented and killed in ways unimaginable. THIS is a primary purpose of the death penalty over life in prison. Justice must be done though it is distasteful, or many more will be destroyed by the “peace” of letting them go and thereby establishing no consequence for wickedness (Daniel 8:25). When America was righteous, she honorably held these values that defended the world from wickedness. Today, in our feminist mindframe that hates the manliness of men, we are repulsed by such violence regardless of its virtue (Jeremiah 50:37).
* * *
Setting-up The Return:
And so, in her compassionate emotionalism Belle distracts Gaston in battle, crying; “don’t hurt him!” and so the Beast gets the upper hand (Matthew 16:19). And now, although beaten and overcome by the beast, Gaston is surprisingly released by the sudden kindness of the Beast as we dramatically see his new heart of Bell’s love overtake his violent nature. So now, with the roles of virtue reversed, violent Gaston sneaks up behind and kills the gentle Beast as a murdering coward would, yet in the process he falls into a very deep (bottomless?) pit, apparently to his deserved death. Bravo. He got what his heartless self deserved!
This is of course the Devil’s version of God’s tale, and so he is going to show his enemy a murdering coward and himself the justified non-aggressive victor in the end, but that is not the way his history, or God's original story goes, which the Devil twisted to arrive at this later version much as the Palestinians do today.
Yet, so far, the actual events are incredibly in tact, though severely twisted to an alternate meaning, therefore we must seriously investigate the scripture to see if we can identify these events and the flaw, rather than simply reject them as rubbish or meaningless entertainment and so be plagued by the poison ingested by our lack of awareness.
And then, like all modern stories, at the last minute, Belle blurts out to the Beast; “I love you” and this key is the feminine magic that not only brings him back from the dead, but also turns this great Beast into a very beautiful man! How wonderful:
"See, the Beast is the Christ that was killed and comes back to life!"
Really? Is that all you got? That’s a pitiful misapplication by a one-verse theology of the story don’t you think? That explanation has to ignore almost all the other analogies and details of the story, (as well as it’s unalterable scriptural blueprints), so that’s obviously not what it means.
"But what else could it mean? The kingdom was restored and they all lived happily ever after."
Since we accepted that the Spirit of God “subliminally” told His message in the earlier telling of Cinderella without the author’s knowing, we must allow the possibility that in today’s darker America there is another spirit telling its own version of the same story, also without the writers’ knowledge. Let me show you what that possibility looks like and you can judge for yourself by the incredible details of a sound interpretation:
* * *
The Scriptural Story of Salvation Severely Twisted by Antichrist:
Remember the old woman in the beginning whose “ugliness melted away to reveal a beautiful enchantress”? What does an enchantress do?
Enchantress: a sorceress; also, a woman of bewitching charms.
Enchant: 1. To act on by charms or sorcery; especially to lay under a spell. 2.Obsolete. Hence, to delude. 3. To delight in a high degree; to charm.
Delude: 1. To lead from truth or into error; to mislead. 2. Obsolete To frustrate or disappoint. 3. Obsolete To evade; elude. -- Syn. Mislead, deceive, beguile, dupe.
The italic “obsolete” in this 1948 Webster’s Dictionary definition, tells us that at one time in the past this word had this specific meaning but now does not. Originally “enchant” meant in a negative way, to delude, but today we see this positively because we actually like the spell’s effect. Today a woman who is enchanting is very appealing to us to the point that we cannot control our emotions toward her. And this is seen today as a good thing? Like the uncontrollable influence of alcohol we want an excuse for why we acted in the debauched way we did when in reality we really wanted to act that way; "I was enchanted."
It is important to note that the ugly old woman was and is always an enchantress, it’s just that her ugly appearance melted away becoming beautiful, this is a perceptional issue. Do we ever want to uncontrollably fall under the spell of an ugly old hag? (shudder) NO! but if she becomes beautiful then YES? Hmmm. Can you define the delusion of lust any better?
The danger we miss for the delight we get, is in the removal of the negative warning in the word, that allows us the unrepentant entrapment by an ugly /wicked woman because the skin is an enchantingly beautiful cover (Psalm 2:1-12, 5:4-6, 10:1-4, Proverbs 4:14-17,19, 7:6-27, etc., etc.). I’m having a hard time seeing the value of “improving” this word by removing its warning of a negative nature that is not what the veneer makes it appear.
So how did this morph from ugly to beauty take place? Melting indicates a process of a change only in presentation of the same elements; like H2O from ice to water and less like a caterpillar to butterfly (though that is the sales-job given through the concept of “transcendence” which we will discuss at length much later).
Since the prince was not delightedly charmed into his Beast state (she seemed beautiful after his judgment was determined), it seems to be a stretch of the definition to suppose her beautiful charms were for him at the start. So let’s suppose then that instead of the prince being enchanted, this tale is a beautiful enchantment to Belle (and therefore to us the viewer). In this case we are bewitched by charms that appeal to us, to see reality (the story) in the interpretation deluded upon us by the director’s carefully crafted beautiful view (; i.e. the animation’s twisted presentment of God’s story), and thereby change our Sunday-School repulsion of the Beast into love. This means that what we understand we are seeing in the animation is not actually an accurate representation of ugly/beauty, and we must break that spell before we can see the truth in the "spell" we are shown as a spell about ugly and beauty. The problem is that we already like what the spell is showing us; we see it as alluringly beautiful. This is enchantment, i.e. delusion... and to us, Belle is the only beauty in the story, hmmmm. And this delusion is also what happened to Belle, but it was done so well that we strongly defend her delusion because we fell for it too!
Now while the enchantress, in the delusion we watch, set up the heartless prince to be revolted by her presentation of ugliness so that she could curse him with an internal struggle that only Belle could break in her captivity, she presented her delusions to us/Belle as beautiful enticements of adventure that drew her heart away from her less attractive village and protection, where she could be enslaved by her benevolent heart through the carefully created circumstances that to Belle’s mindframe had no alternative. Belle was not declared a slave until she agreed to be so, but having rejected the one who had the power to both rescue her father and slay the Beast, she now “had no alternative.” But then by the enchantment of melting her perspective, what was once repulsive to Bell became beautiful, though it was all the same delusion that we buy. This concept is complex by layers of delusion upon delusion (*10). The important thing to note is that there is a far more critical distinction between slave and bondman than a title (see Post 077
Washington’s Slaves http://when-did-reason-die.blogspot.com/2010/07/washingtons-slaves.html).
In the audio commentary track of this DVD with producer Don Hahn, and co-directors Kirk Wise and Gary
Trousdale, they said;
“One of the nice things about this telling of Beauty And The Beast is that we start the story from the Beast’s point of view…The nice thing about it is that we give you the history of the beast and then we ask the question, you know, the whole key to the beast’s salvation is if he can find someone to love him. The amazing David OgdenStiers, as himself; as the narrator, literally asked the audience ‘who could learn to love a beast?’ and we cut to Belle, as a cue; question and answer, so you’ve got these two fuses that are lit and you know eventually these two story threads are going to intertwine, these two characters are destined to meet.”
This director’s description is incredibly telling though I believe he has no idea the magnitude of what he was actually saying:
The focus in this story of redemption, is to get Bell/Christians to love the Beast/Satan(*11), not for the salvation of Bell, but of the Beast! (*13.5).
This goal is not even hidden from us because we are already so far deluded that we allow the consideration that perhaps we should if the defense provides a convincing argument! Oh the danger to foolish young Belle, who does not read the Law of the Great Judge but makes it up from her emotions as she goes!
According to God himself; is Satan redeemable? And should emotionally driven mankind, using the very nature of Christ, attempt his redemption against God’s Sovereign judgment?
This very thought is the declared sum and purpose of this animation!
Returning from (*10) we now understand that in this demonic telling, Belle, as the confused but adventurous youthful Christian, is presented as the enchantress that, from an ugliness of perspective, made the prince a monster, and so she must change herperspective in order to transform the Beast that she made. In otherwords; The Beast is a beast because Belle made him so, from her justified revulsion!
Is Jesus/
Yeshu(*12) the Messiah ever, in the perspective of Christianity or in Islam, a Beast that needs to be loved in order to tame his violent nature? No... But Allah and his Jesus are, and I propose that although the writers of the story had no idea, the Scriptures literally call
that Jesus/Isa “the beast” (Daniel 7:17,19-23, Revelation 13:11,17:8,11, etc.), and all through this movie, even from Belle, he is never called anything but “Beast.”
This animation accuses Christianity of an ugliness toward Satan that we must change by a growing understanding that leads to redeeming love! Prophetically this change of perspective will indeed take place by those who depart the foundational (provincial town) Jehovah’s faith (I Timothy 4:1-2, Colossians 2:18), and Daniel 3:28 as re-interpreted from this “new perspective” of the New Age Assyrian; king Nebuchadrezzar. In fact, the accusation is that Satan is really not ugly at all, once you get to know him; it is the unforgiving Christians who have made him out to be an unredeemable monster by a wrong perspective, and therefore it is our duty to melt that ugliness of unforgiveness and to become the beautiful lover; the feminine redeemer that transforms him into the Christ “he has potential to be.” Humanity redeems the Messiah!
(Ok, I’m not wry anymore; the implications are just plain disturbing!)
Of all the many options the directors declared they had to choose from, no one knows why they “happened” to end up drawing the Beast having a Diablo head with horns and all, it just seemed like the right image to give him. I want to be clear; I highly respect these artist’s great effort and accomplishment that was a laborious coalition work of skill and talent. From watching the interviews, behind the scenes, explanations, audio narrations, and “making of”, it’s quite obvious that they did not collaborate to intended any such deeper dark spiritual meaning. But nonetheless the deeper meaning that is present is just too perfectly amazing not be accepted as specifically intended, even if they the creators of it, intended no such thing. So is the creation of this animated movie an act of free will or supernatural determination? It’s all just one in the same, by the truth that spirits move the minds of men… whether they know it or not.
In previous posts I declared that I was convinced the producers and animators of Cinderella were not working from an intentional Christian perspective and I believe were very probably not even professing Christians themselves. But because the Spirit of God was the authorized social authority in this land at the time, He moved on them to produce his will as they performed their own free will.
If this is the case then the reverse is also to be considered in these latter times of America as we have officially and legally driven God from the position of authority, to be replaced by we know not what, nor do we seem to care.
I do not believe the producers and animators of Beauty and the Beast were demon possessed Satan worshipers any more than their counterparts of Cinderella were Christians, but that the spirit of Antichrist is now the lawfully approved social authority in our land to work his will through us as we perform our own free will. This influence is greatly limited by personal devotion to God regardless of the national condition, but our resistance to the demonic spirit authority will now be punished as disobedience (Ephesians 6:12). Thus, Ephesians 6:11.
But because God the Father through his Son Jesus Christ is the Actual Creator of all things regardless of our recognition of such, His laws of reality are irrevocable, (though efforts against them will appear successful for a time: Daniel 7:25b). In truth, only our chosen interaction with that law is variable; i.e. perspective, which is what this animation is all about changing. Therefore for proper interpretation of the un-removable yet corruptible Types in this onion-layer presentation of man’s relationship with Christ, we must discover just who are represented by whom.
Watching the DVD again with the idea that the Beast is the prince of Allah/Satan and Gaston is the Jesus of Jehovah, it should utterly startle you by what you see, but only if you are familiar with Christ's Spirit through the Christian scriptures, and, at least generally comprehend the spirit of Antichrist. If the Beast in this telling is Allah’s Jesus, then Gaston must be the Christ who was originally born into the Hebrew world of old faith (the town) as one from among them but greater than them. Yet now we see the Christ, as Gaston, not meek as in his first coming, but a bold conquering type, and so we can comprehend that this telling, through the eyes of Satan, is of the arrogant Christ in the time after his second-coming arrival to Judge the Beast and his kingdom:
“And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war…and his name was called The Word of God. And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse (Gaston/Jesus), and against his army. And the beast was taken, and…cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone” Revelation 19:11,13b,19-20.
(This post is already extremely long so I will only touch on the truth that this casting into the lake of fire seems to be at the singular event of Christ’s coming. But by study we know there is a 1000 yearlong incarceration in the bottomless pit at the return of Christ, before this hot-lake dunking takes place. As the scriptures shrink the timeline for simplifying the intended point, so we can momentarily do the same in this post and move on).
“But why would Christ Yeshua do such a cruel thing to such a wonderfully rehabilitated Beast?”
“And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition. And the ten horns…receive power as kings one hour with the beast. These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful” Revelation 17:11-14.
“Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, break in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet…Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces” Daniel 17:19,23.
“And I saw thrones, and they that sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands…” Revelation 20:4.
As Hitler had his devoted Belle named
Eva Braun (http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Eva_Braun), so it would seem that Belle and the viewer of this bewitching animation, has been slightly misled (said wryly) as to the nature of this beast and his ability to be reformed by love. Such a covenant-of-love with death (Isaiah 28:15) always ends in decomposition (Isaiah 28:18-20).
Many today in confidence feel no concern of falling to such an obvious delusion of loving the monster, yet many of those same people have already fallen to the delusion’s beginning stages in the animal rights excessive compassion for the animals God himself directed us to use (Genesis 9:2-3). This perhaps began in the 1942 animation of Bambi where we attached inordinate emotion to the deer we eat and thereby troubled our weak sensitivities against the “cruel” man that would kill it to feed his children. Now almost two generations later we have the same feminine sensitivities regarding the fate of Satan himself because our heart goes out to him as it did to the poor deer.
As comfortable Christians (in the gender typology of modern women) we have long been able in our protected polite environment to be forgiving, gentle, tolerant, compassionate, and forgiving, of our enemies, so we find ourselves at odds with Christ’s/Gaston’s “rude, conceited,” and “primeval” manliness in his second coming. These negative feelings are displayed and encouraged in the animation presentation of Gaston.
I find it noteworthy that several times the topic of hunting was brought up regarding Gaston, and in today’s Animal Rights feminine mindframe this is a negative “cruel” value and intentionally capitalized on for that affect. As the Christ Type, Gaston is actually proud of something society today sees as repulsive in his description of a happy home and Belle as his potential wife with “My latest kill roasting on the fire.” This is a direct description of hunting as provider, and an indirect description of the animal sacrifices that will continue through his millennial reign (Jeremiah 17:25-26). But this is not appealing to Belle, nor today’s “Christian” society who buy their meat, all sanitized from gore, at the local grocery store as if it wasn’t once a living animal.
And again we see the very common conflict between the genders that represent these truths! What she was not willing to explore with “primeval” Gaston she is more than willing to work through with “an actual” Beast. Nice girl, but you really have to question her taste in men.
“Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?” Romans 6:16.
Note that righteousness takes a voluntary obedience to righteousness (; i.e. laws in the provincial town), while by the simple neglect of obedience, the resulting sin seems to be void of such a knowledgeable service ( “I want something more unknown in the great wide somewhere unknown”). Yet freeing herself from the obedience to “rules of righteousness”, she is by default the servant to sin and the end is bondage by emotion to the Beast of death, which bondage we saw dramatically as she evaluated whether she should keep running or stay and help the Beast. While Belle thought she was freeing herself from the narrow rules of the Christian faith/town to explore her Christian faith without such restrictions, she was running to the service of the Beast without seeing the chainless bondage until too late to change course. At that point her options seemed only between continuing in miserable servitude or learning to love the Beast who has enslaved/conquered her by her own will.
Now with this in mind we have a whole new appreciation for the “Provincial” town. But in the complexity of this story both being told by Satan and the fact that the “Christian” world of faith has become shamefully Paganized (as represented by the drinking, the three provocatively dressed silly girls, the married shopkeeper eyeing a female customer, and the boy chasing after swine), we actually see a reasonable representation of our condition, and Belle, the earnest but confused young Christian, is somewhat justifiably frustrated by living there… She just doesn’t need help by the Antichrist animators to despise it and leave it without a plan! (Revelation 12:10, Matthew 24:11). It’s the lens we have been given by the Devil to look through that convinces Belle, and us, that Gaston is a cad when in truth he is a very able and devoted Savior of the town and Belle, if she would but have him and learn that he is not what the animators have made him out to be.
But Belle and the viewer will have nothing to do with him because her heart loathes him and this town, though not in open rebukable rebellion but rather as Simon of Acts 8 who simply lacks the spirit of it all. The animation shows us her perception of things, but not the reality, and so having only one side of the story we ignorantly agree with Belle, and in so loathing, she is prepped to do for the Beast what she would not do for Gaston, that is; give him a chance by getting to know him. So while Belle accuses the town of being too narrowly judgmental (small) she has done exactly that by rejecting Gaston.
“WHO is actually the One True God, that gets to decide what is good and what is bad?” (Isaiah chapter 43)
and we realize that in choosing between the two, Belle believes the right answer is; “HER”.
In the primary onion-layer this Belle is not the First Generation Exodus people who refused to cross the Jordan River (Numbers 14:1-25); she is more. While they all remained with Moses on the wrong side of the river, her young heart, being proactively dissatisfied with this situation, instead of reactively patiently waiting her turn to cross in the latter rain (James 5:7), is set on experiencing an exciting unknown alternative. In willful determination not to accept Gaston, she unwittingly chose the Beast as her savior and Christ; in effect (re)turning to the Egypt that had enslaved her father! But she has done worse than even that.
Although her "end times" second-generation story is somewhat different than theirs (Numbers 32:20-23), she won’t ultimately succeed because she is spiritually among the people of Korah, who made themselves equal to Moses/Christ and chose their own way before God (Numbers 16:1-4) as did Satan himself (Isaiah 14:13-14+Daniel 5:21-22). She is a Second-Gen-Christian gone bad (Hosea 7:16), though in youthful ignorance rather than mature experience, as expressed by the marriage of circumcision that doesn’t come till after the crossing. But regardless, God will not allow a successful turn to Egypt bearing his name (Isaiah 31:1,3), yet may allow a progressive period of personal trial-and-error in hopes she might “wake up” before she gets all the way committed into the covenant of death (Isaiah 28:15). But as we see with Belle, the progress is a single step at a time, that with the ends unknown, is not battled by more than a surrendering “show” of cute girlish resistance as she fearlessly explores her captivity as an “alarming” but exciting experience. Although the promise of eternal salvation through faith remains intact in principle, the lesson of Korah informs us that there are "Christians" who will nonetheless find themselves in Hell… even if they are cast out from the kingdom of heaven itself! (Matthew 22:11-13, Numbers 16:16-33, Ezekiel 28:14-16).
Now how enchanting is her beauty to keep you on her side of the perspective? Have you learned to love Belle by familiarity, just as she learned to love the Beast? Will you not turn from her and her folly, or am I just being provincial?
* * *
Fairytale Application:
With this knowledge of the “fairytale sales job” corruption of a true prophecy, we are able to see that Islam confirms that the Beast is typed by the male gender as the image of Allah, and his cruel domination over his captive woman/Belle, until she comes around, is declared natural because it is in the image of mankind’s relationship with Allah. It is only presumed to be her job to try and change his cruelty with her love, but the success is not important to anyone but the girl as long as she conforms, i.e. the melting of her ugly resistance to his violent nature.
And of course, this is a natural element of the feminine mystique designed by God to help her man (I Peter 3:1-2), whomever he is (Genesis 2:18). Satan is not capable in creation to come up with his own material since he is a destroyer not a creator. So he must corrupt what God designed with the intent to disrupt God’s program and adapt it to his own plans. You cannot simply toss out the corruption in bulk because by doing so you would also toss out God’s design with it: After the cancer has taken root it takes a trained surgeon to make such a division, and that training is available to everyone in salvation through the scriptures led by the Spirit’s instruction (Ephesians 6:17, Hebrews 4:12), yet to be a good surgeon takes diligence and practice (II Timothy 2:15). Today, complex spiritual surgery is a forgotten art, and by the high number of quacks in the field wielding knives, most are resistant to the surgeon and would rather keep their cancer; going instead to “Dr.”
Rob Bell who tells them;
“Sing two worship songs and hug yourself in the morning, everything will be fine if you love the Beast”
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rG1CDec4qkg&feature=youtu.be).
In truth, a woman’s endearing generous tender heart of compassion is the same heart that gets her in trouble when she becomes willful to practice that heart in her unprotected independence of liberation from.... What? protection? guardianship? men? Gaston? It is this unguided liberated heart that draws her to the Beast that she had no business getting to know for any reason. But don’t forget, Belle represents Christian humanity, and unguided, we all have this spiritually wandering heart that gravitates away from what is right, and toward what is wrong (Jeremiah 17:9+Job 13:7). Like our politicians; Belle gets into trouble trying to negotiate with the Beast for the release of her father Israel (Jude 1:9). It’s a worthy desire, though not carried out in God’s wisdom or protection.
* * *
But there is still more:
Islam loves to capture or “purchase” slave wives just as did the Beast in the animation by staged negotiation; first to release her father, and then by enchantment of forced familiarity. This fairytale instructs your daughters to accept this fate and learn to love her boyfriend/captor because he is just a troubled monster that needs her transforming love to find his humanity. But how many of these human stories actually turn out that way, rather than simply destroy the young girl with good intentions?
Is this what we expect now from the likes of Natalie Holloway? What other choice does she have? The cure for this problem was avoided way back before she was found in a place and condition to be kidnapped. Where was her protector, guardian and guide? She had spurned such a person to “go-it alone” on her exciting adventure.
Regarding female captives, there is a syndrome that is so predictable it even has a name:
Stockholm syndrome (http://ask.yahoo.com/20030324.html). In time the hostage victim becomes utterly confused and, by the very nature that God gave them for other reasons, actually grows emotionally attached to their captor so that when they are set free they will not go. After they are happy to stay, does that make it right? This is what your children pre-learn by watching
Beauty and the Beast while thinking it is teaching them to love their God ordained husbands with his natural “ruff spots”, which it sort-of is, but only as a springboard to something else. This is the problem of crossing the right perspective with the wrong event.
In my previous suggestion that God might allow a progressive experience until she is either “shaken awake” or unrecoverable lost, we see that point-in-time as Belle stands beside her horse wanting to flee, but torn with the nurturing emotion of her gender toward a monster she got to know. This is her final chance to escape. The reason is because after this point, she stays by choice. Yes, the game of “I’m a captive” continues for a while longer, but only for her personal justification of why she is there. From here on she is committed to this situation as her own, she has succumbed to Stockholm’s. She choses this side of the Jordan. She has missed her Rapture.
Now Belle, the wandering Christian youth in the hands of the Beast, becomes the enchantment of Chrislam, whose perspective departs not from her faith, but transforms that presumed ugly faith, melting it into a beautiful Love for Allah and the Beast that supposedly changes his nature for her in return. In so doing Belle the Christian actually despises Christ as a cruel arrogant cad that just the thought of being his wife makes her ill! This animated production is the step-by-step explanation of how it takes place and the evidence that you have already fallen to its charms through utter ignorance. And you buy this animation for your Christian children because… it’s just so cute?
Look, you won’t go to Hell if you watch the DVD (but you might if you accept its powerful captivating charm and are drawn away by what you see). You really need to see it for yourself with this fully alert perspective (*13), it will show you how very real and current that this “New Age” is, and how the apostate Church, with the world, will gladly receive their Messiah’s mark (Revelation 13:17) knowing that it isn’t the scriptural Christ but still feeling they are obedient to scripture. DON’T assume by the word “apostate” that it doesn’t include you, rather make sure that it doesn’t!
But do you really think the twisting of this important Type is over yet?
No. Satan still has much more for you to absorb in order to catch up to your children who accept what you give them without resistance because you yourself have already fallen to the trap in thinking its wonderful stuff.
Oh that’s right, it’s just a harmless cartoon, My bad (Matthew 13:12-16).
* * * * * * *
(*1)
Scientific ( empirical) method of testing theories: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_method).
(*2) Who Saves Who?
Ever After, Pretty Woman, Tangled, etc., in these “New World” stories it is easy to miss who the savior is. By making ourselves (Bell/humanity) judiciously equal to Gaston (man/Christ) we see ourselves as equal partners with Christ, which allows us to drive forward with our own values in the relationship, just as the Little Mermaid previously did with her father/God, overcoming that earlier obsitcle to now work on the husband. And while this does indeed succeed in getting us “somewhere”, just where that “somewhere” is, needs to be examined very carefully before we go (Acts 20:28-32, Luke 21:34-36, etc.), [more to come on this line of thought in a future Post titled; “Tangled”].
(*3) Belle is vain:
Watch the vain air in which while singing she twice touches her hair, and the words of her song seeing her townspeople as “little.” Adorable perhaps, but greatly needing a spanking to drive out her self-righteous foolish mindframe (Proverbs 13:24, 22:15). The poor baker was trying to keep his spiritual business going but Belle simply couldn’t appreciate such “smallness” in the face of such “great wide” possibilities created in her mind by fantasy; i.e. the fairytales; i.e. the Enchanted Kingdom of Walt Disney, in the Type of Satan’s.
(*4) The Little Mermaid Spirit:
In the long silence between 1959 and 1989, after Disney’s Sleeping Beauty, America went through quite a change in natures, most notably in 1963-64 at the Judicial level of removing faith from our national institutions thus making our own governmental ideas equal with God’s. The spirit of Ariel, the little mermaid, became the new keystone nature to which all subsequent princesses have been compared, even to the belittlement of the former roll-model ladies in “the Princess club” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belle_%28Disney%29 one of many examples).
(*5) Vapid: Having lost its life, spirit, or zest; insipid; hence dull; spiritless; inane.
Insipid: 1. Without taste or savor; vapid. 2. Wanting in spirit; uninteresting; flat; dull.
It is immediately awkward to actually call this very spirited hero “vapid”, but what we must understand is that he does not appeal to Belle, nor to us, because of how we view him (as carefully directed by the crafted spell of the animation). He is obviously full of life, spirit, and zest, but this presentation to us is of a nature that makes him vapid to what appeals to us. What he has to offer has become lost to us by our distaste. It’s not his life that is vapid; it’s our perspective that makes it so. We see this village life through Belle’s eyes and we agree with her because we are like her. But the roles all through this presentation are the reverse of what they appear to be.
This reverse view is strangely confirmed by the stained glass windows at the beginning of the film, where after the curse we see a distinct vertical line between the sunny village and the stormy cursed kingdom, there is a red cross on the herald shield of the town but a black sword on the herald shield of the Beast’s kingdom. I didn’t draw them there… But somebody did!
The story makes the village, and its hero, out to be the aggressor and the Beast and his kingdom generally willing to be friendly in the compromise of fellowship. But even in the story we know this is not really true!
I was recently asked if I thought all believers in Islam are evil, even moderates. Although the dishes mean well, and with a kind and genuine heart reached out to Belle in pleasant compassion, the Beast could not have won her heart without their influence on her (strangely disobeying Qur’an 5:51+5:60) which we see evidenced by the enchanted dishes’ fear of their prince’s wrath because of their work with her in encouraging her to love him. In this way, “Yes”; the Moderate Muslims are evil because their God is the Beast, and I do not hold it against them that they feel the same way toward us:
As Christians we are to genuinely love them and reach out to them in a seemingly similar way and in a similar single purpose to win them to our God; the God of love and forgiveness. This will either win them or make them mad, and if being their very real friend is not the supreme goal but a valuable by-product of their salvation, then their particular reaction will not confuse us or hinder our aim of their salvation, which we don’t keep secret or hidden.
Specifically named but used merely as an example, Berkeley is an extremely liberal progressive institution of education that is destroying the foundations of America/Christianity (i.e. this little provincial village) through their books of exciting fantasy such as; Evolution, quasi-science, Globalism, and claiming the “little people” just trying to make an honest living (faith) are primeval and holding them back. This animation is incredibly insightful with details!
(*7) Provincial: adj. 1. A Of, pertaining to, or characteristic of, a province. B.
Of or pertaining to the provinces (especially in British use), specifically [cap.] the Provinces of Canada. 2. Exhibiting the ways or manners of a province; countrified; rude. 3. Confined to a province; hence, narrow; limited; as, provincial interests. Having lost its life, spirit, or zest; insipid; hence dull; spiritless; inane.
Now since you didn’t know that, do you suppose your children do? Yet we were all more than willing to agree with her that Belle’s town was provincial in the negative meaning - whatever it meant. It’s clear that Belle went to Berkeley and was educated to consider her people were behind the times. Like returning to Egypt, she was looking for something else, whatever it turned out to be. This is the New Proactive Cinderella.
(*8) Godless vs. godless:
Continuing throughout my work I have elected to capitalize Godless/Christless in the effort to distinguish the lack of serving Jehovah/Yeshua from a lack of serving any god/christ which I show as lowercase; godless/christless. This is primarily because Islam now uses these same words; God and Christ, to mean their own version, which must be kept distinct from our own lest our perception of God/Christ become corrupted by ignorance, as in Beauty and the Beast.
(*9) Nuremberg Trials:
(*10) The Changing Woman:
We see the likelihood that this same description of the changing enchantress, is of Belle’s faith as well, and it becomes evident by the animator’s declaration; “this story is about the Beast’s Salvation” (not Belle’s), that their intent is that Belle’s faith is the enchantress who once was ugly while in the restrictive provincial laws (perspective) of her town, then slowly melted her icy perspective of the Beast once she left the town and warmed to know him by forced familiarity. The result is that by this melting, the ugliness of Belle’s faith melted away and flowered into a beauty that the Beast could love because she loved him first. A dramatic reversal of the true Christ (I John 4:19) and classic corruption by Antichrist.
The powerful key in these “princess” stories is to remember to keep the focus on the prince and not on the princess. If she can keep that in mind then the confusion of what she should do will be greatly diminished:
“If the story is about Satan, I don’t participate”
See how easy that is? (John 10:4-5, II Timothy 2:22, James 4:7-10).
(*11) Antichrist or Satan?
In this post I have endeavored to maintain continuity by always identifying the Beast as Antichrist, which he is, by the comprehension that Satan is Allah; the king of the beast prince. But there is also another thread that shows the Beast is actually Satan himself as the Beast Prince cast out by the actual King; Jehovah. This apparent schism in my application is cleared up when we remember that in the animation, the beast is really a “shell” in which a beautiful man is contained. Satan, the beautiful angel of light (II Corinthians 11:14), is cast to earth and takes form in the Antichrist man that the scriptures call the beast, much as the Son of God when coming to earth, was God in the flesh but still a man separate from the Father who remained in heaven. We are speaking spiritual things described in temporal application. The Revelation 17 Beast is both Satan and a man.
(*12)
Jesus/Yeshua (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshua_%28name%29):
It is becoming increasingly important to distinguish which Jesus we are talking about since Islam has their own Jesus with an entirely different nature from the scripture’s Yeshua, yet claims to be “that guy” by subversion. Joshua of Moses, as the Type, becomes very important in identifying our previous Christ from our returning Christ with the same Spirit. (The Spirit is the vital element of identification, which is why it’s imperative that we have it!). For this reason it is becoming necessary to now speak of Yeshua rather than simply Jesus. In this same light, God is no longer an adequate term for Jehovah. As a Gentile believer I resist using these Hebrew names but find I now must.
(*13) The Many Twisted Types:
(*13.1) The Kingdoms:
The directors have told us by interview, that the stained glass window intentionally tells us the backstory of the Beast. As the story opens, zooming up to the window, we hear the narrator begin the story:
“Once upon a time in a far away land, a young prince lived in a shining castle.
Although he had everything his heart desired, the prince was spoiled, selfish, and unkind. But then, one winter’s night…” and it goes on to describe his punishment.
Let’s hear that same story from the ancient scripture:
“…Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering…the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. Thou are the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God…Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: Therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God…” and it goes on to describe his punishment. Ezekiel 28:12-19.
To add to this already overwhelming parallel, we see in the stained glass window that this prince in his castle wears a cross upon his crown. By self-declaration this prince is not the king and the shining castle he lived in was not his own. Yet as the Beast in answer to Belle’s inquiry, he declared himself to be “the master of this castle” to which he was banished (Revelation 12:7-9). Look back at the windows, and in the first, we see that the shining castle he first lived in, and his small silver crown, are not the same as in the tiny castle of the second window with a master’s crown, these represent the kingdoms of Heaven and Earth. How is it possible that the writers, producers, animators, and approvers, collectively created such a perfect analogy of scripture without being more studied in Christianity than most seminary professors!?
(*13.2) The Beast Prince is the 8th GDE/Assyrian/Antichrist (Revelation 17:11). The cross on the prince’s second crown (in the window after the kingdom in the very first window and before he is the Beast) is indication that he has acquired the Christian domain (Luke 4:5-7), which is consistent with the wicked stepmother authority figure over Cinderella in her own house by the act of Adam/Cinderella’s father.
(*13.3) The Old Woman is perhaps the spirit of religion the Apostate Church/Mystery Babylon/Bell’s blasphemous Christian faith/Rob Bell, all the humanity that Satan hates and has been long trying to destroy regardless of their various religions. Her curse for him is in his unwillingness to see their value and benefit even when she is standing on his doorstep with apparently nothing to offer; being the creation of God, he hates them all. Now don’t be mislead, this is the demonic telling that leads us to consider alternate angles to a Godless success by using and twisting the truth that by such use is not true. We are not trying to get our theology from this telling, just learn of the truth what has been twisted, so that we can help extract the captives. The old woman is truly the early version of world religion. Upon his recogition of her beauty/potential he has a change of heart, but she has become his adversary and the world religions see Satan as the enemy. Now his game is how to win her heart.
(*13.4) The Beautiful Enchantress reveals a Genesis 6:2 alluring appeal to the Beast that changes how he sees humanity and religion. To my observation, Christians always see Mystery Babylon as a “dark-ally skank” that has no appeal to their good moral compass. This is because the scriptures describe her to us for what she is: a Great Whore (Revelation 17:1-6). But then in triggered perception of this woman, we miss that it also tells us she is very beautifully and alluringly refined (Revelation 18:7,9,11-16). Her alluring beauty will be so enchanting that a man would have to nearly be gay to resist her! The “less than greatly earnest Christian” will not recognize this beautiful lady as the whore the scriptures describe (Revelation 17:4a) and will fall to her mysterious draw, be warned! (Matthew 24:24).
In the stained glass window the enchantress is perhaps the spirit of unified religion, and the three stars in her crown are likely Judaism, Christianity, and Islam united under the spell of her gentle feminine grace. In the first of two related windows, her wand targets the center star but all three are obviously encompassed by the pointy golden aura (Revelation 17:18+18:4-5+23b). But in the second window as “punishment”, her wand now produces the same golden aura from the stars, targeted on the bent back of the prince, presumably now a spiritual burden as all three faiths are combined into a single element city born on his back (Revelation 17:3,7,18). He had his chance to accommodate her but now she rides him for her own interests to his discomfort of lust and hate.
Notice that she is dressed in green and emerging as a flower from a green plant, most probably indicating her power is sourced in the religion of environmentalism through Nature/Mother Earth/Gaia/Femininity, and in the second such window we see her now removed from the plant and in this power she is Mystery Babylon the city of collective wonderful wickedness (Revelation 17:18+18:3, Nahum 3:4) to declare Islam the Beast because of his violent cruelty and thereby deflect attention to her own violence (Revelation 17:6). But we see the Crescent of the window without a divider, indicating that both her and the prince are in this Islamic domain together under the moon god Allah, Al-Ilah (Revelation 17:7) (*2).
(*13.5) The Rose and 21 Years:
The magic rose that the Enchantress gave to the Beast, was to perpetually bloom until the last peddle fell in the Beast’s 21st year (meaning at the end of his last year of hope). Our present reality, by happen chance, is the twelfth year (i.e. near the beginning), of the 21st century of the world in the hands of Satan after Jesus the Christ was killed outside Jerusalem. Is this an intentional Type by the animator’s, suggesting that we have less than 90 years to go? I don’t know but I doubt it, even in the face of its high improbability of being a coincidence. But nonetheless, the many details are quickly stacking up to preach a very specifically twisted story regarding the world’s true chronological reality long ago laid out in the prophecies of scriptures. So let’s explore this “21 years” in this light:
As the enchanted castle dishes get excited to finally have a purpose after so many years, we hear this melancholy verse in the middle of their enthusiastic song as if it is stuffed in where it doesn’t belong. The first three lines go just fine and are an easy transition from the exuberance that came before, but then the words do not rhyme, are out of meter, and simply odd, and the singing of them doesn’t help it either. It’s just all around weird, without any purpose to the animated story, and so we must conclude the information is intentionally important to the writers, even if they can’t make it fit well:
“Life is so unnerving
For a servant who’s not serving
He’s not whole without a soul to wait upon,
Ah, those good old days when we were useful
Suddenly those good old days are gone.
Ten years we’ve been rusting
Needing so much more than dusting
Needing exercise, a chance to use our skills,
Most days we just lay around the castle
Flabby, fat and lazy
You walked in and oops-a-daisy!
It’s a guest
It’s a guest” (*14)
Now as a filler song this is acceptably cute and perhaps we can’t expect solid substance in such a wild concept of lively dishes. But why this melancholy drop right in the middle? Where did they come up with this period of ten years without anyone to serve?
If we conjecture that the Enchanted Rose is time , which began as the 4th Diverse Beast when Satan’s GDE took power over the earth at the same time Jesus was born as a man (Revelation 12:10), and that event began a new counting that started at year 1, Then it seems apparent by the calendar that the “clock” is now in the Beast’s 21st and last century; the last 100 year period in which he must win the love of Christian Belle before the last peddle falls and he can never be redeemed.
This theory suggests that the Magic Rose’s 21 years of life represents 2100 years of the Beast-as-a-beast according to the calendar, therefore we can assume that 10 years represents 1000. But regardless, here at the 21st year of the Beast’s rule, why declare they had been “rusting” for only 1000 (10) years? This suggests these dishes had company for the first 1100 (11) years of the Beast before something changed and the company no longer came, or some other reason they did not serve anyone. I’ve got nothing. The power of the Empire of Islam ended in 1924 at the dissolution of the Caliphate in Turkey, but this date and time period does not match the song. Yet still, as you watch the movie and follow the words of this verse, the song is just painfully awkward. It simply has to have a significant point that even the writers knew or why would they have put this awkwardness into their otherwise carefully crafted work of art?
So, what if these lonely dishes without a soul to serve for 1000 years is somehow speaking of a future period? I know of 1000 years in which the Beast will be locked away in a pit (Revelation 20:2-3) and the power of the Demonic kingdom will be suspended, putting the dishes/angelics/“people” on a shelf to rust away without exercise or practicing their skills on a single guest because they have no kingdom to receive them in (Revelation 20:1-10). My problem is that I can’t see how the timing of Belle’s coming works around the 21 years of the rose in this 21st Century calendar timeline. That screw, though close, doesn’t seem to fit the hole, and I’m not going to force it. There is something significant here and I hope to discover the detailed specifications to find the right fit, and when I do, there will be no doubt.
(*13.6) The Magic Mirror fits the scriptures by seeing “the outside world” free of the view through the deceitful spell. Even as we look into the mirror in the animation, we always see the way things are and not the way the animation spell tells the people it is: pay attention to the beast in the mirror, who really does love Belle at the end (Genesis 6:2<4) though the villagers don’t see that perspective. But that doesn’t mean we are getting the whole picture! This is still “dangerous leading” to us the viewer, as we think we are smarter than the townsmen who read the mirror wrong, and smarter than than the delusion that we are watching, (More on this another time).
Note too that the Rose and the Mirror rest on a table supported on the strained backs of mankind. The clear vision of the scriptures in the possession of the Beast, will remain a burden hard to bear during the determined duration of this kingdom; i.e. mirror and rose.
(*13.7) Crescent of Islam:
Note the disproportionate high number of crescent moons in the stained glass windows even in daylight hours; the common sign of Islam’s moon God Allah; Al-Ilah over the whole cursed kingdom portion, and as we watch the windows this demonic telling of the story shows the kingdom has always been divided, with an interesting reversal of sides.
(*13.8) Bell is the beautiful but pleasantly willful “innocent” Christian youth. She is the apostate church that surrenders to the Beast with full knowledge of to whom she is making her service, by declaring; “Come into the light,” before agreeing to his lifelong terms. She joins with the Beast rather tentatively at first, but join him she does. This is Chrislam, and will for a time actually appear to work well to bring peace to the earth under Islam. Only the town followers of Gaston who will not yield, will be severely maltreated as stubborn, quite perhaps without Belle’s knowledge at the beginning, but without concern at the end because her heart is given to the Beast. This allegiance is shown by her heartfelt defense of Beast as the townfolks make ready to rid him.
(*13.9) Gaston is Jesus the Christ returned, made to look the rude cad by a corrupted perspective of his character and mission. Extract all the implications, fabricated motives, assumed attitudes and personality, and you end up with a pretty accurate image and events of the returning Christ. I have long preached that as Israel missed the coming of the meek Christ because they wanted a conqueror, this generation will miss Gaston the conquering Christ because they are sensitively minded and their Politically Correct sensibilities that “love everyone”, will not stomach what he must do. He is indeed coming as a Judge (II Timothy 4:1, Romans 2:16, [3:5-6 regarding our offended sensibilities], Hebrews 12:24-25).
(*13.10) Gaston’s Small Friend LeFou is the witness that always promotes Yeshua the Christ. I recon I must be a Type of him and I realize many see me as just such a devoted fool. While the animators were simply looking for a gag by making Gaston hit LeFou at every reasonable opportunity, it resulted in an accurate (but wrongly interpreted) Type of Christ’s discipline of, and intentional abuse of, his most loved elect for a greater purpose and reward (Hebrews 12:8, 11:36-40, Revelation 20:4-5). And all the while LeFou acted like he didn’t even notice because of his single focus on his hero and not himself. The sole key to this success is to realize your story is really all about your prince.
(*13.11) The Three Barmaids are not prostitutes as I had first thought. They are every silly, simple-minded young Christian girl (again representing Christian humanity in both genders) who by an ignorant desire to fit in to modern culture simply dress and act like it. Their faith, though pathetically limited, is still good enough to remain in Christ’s town (faith) because they are simply love struck with Jesus (Romans 10:9, Acts 13:47-48, John 3:15-16, etc.). The animators have suggested that these are the only kind of belivers Christ can get, as Gaston goes after Belle, a wandering Christian he desires to recover (Matthew 18:12) but can’t. And of a truth, in the end it’s not Belle but the three girls who make it, if their simple faith of devotion holds out (Revelation 3:7-11). These silly girls, and the boy gleefully chasing the pig, are the second generation, who, having no bondage to the law of “business practice”, happily cross the Jordan River into the Promised Land when the time comes (Matthew 18:3). Notice of all the turbulence in the tavern, these girls showed virtually no fear because of their utter faith in their hero. IF Gaston had told them to wait in the corner till he came to them in the morning, they may have been board but still there in the morning eager for his arrival whenever he showed (James 5:8, I Corinthians 4:5), the thought of rebuking him for their discomfort would not have even crossed their mind. We can learn a lot about contentment and faith from these simple girls, though they give Gaston and the town a bad reputation by their silly minds and worldly appearance. I have searched to find which Prophetic Church these girls fit, and besides Revelation 3:7-11 there is another specific place; among the worldly influence of Thyatira where they fit perfectly (Revelation 2:24-25).
Now while Belle had a whole lot more “going on” and was more desirable because of it, she isn’t the one who ended up with Gaston in the end. Christ is looking for a Belle, who with all her depth that makes her most beautiful, still sees Gaston as an unmatched hero and protector. This is what “everyman” also desires in a wife.
(*13.12) Belle’s Father is Adam/Israel. These are both onion layers of the same kind of consequences for sin of the leadership. In Cinderella he was more Adam where here he is more Israel, this is due to the time frame of the events portrayed as the progression is closer to the Matthew 24:3 “end of the world”. It should shock you to consider the huge changes of global condition between the productions of these two animations.
When Belle appeals to the Beast for Israel’s release lest he die, the angry reply is “he shouldn’t have trespassed here.” This is their perpetual “land occupation” conflict with Islam, that while not existing at the time Cinderella was written and so her father was declared dead, today in the production of Beauty and the Beast, after Israel has revived, the “trespassing conflict” continues as he lives.
(*13.13) His Contraption is perhaps the Jewish Temple, which they have for years tried to make work the way it should, then it breaks and they try again, and will eventually succeed just before being captured by the Beast (Daniel 12:11+Matthew 24:16). But notice that his capture actually occurs as he tries to publicly promote his long troubled success with the machine (Daniel 9:27), notice too that it chops, perhaps the butchering blade of the temple sacrifices.
(*13.14) The Provincial Town is Judeo biblical faith in practice. But the adults and business people of this town are the first generation that was content to remain on this side of the river with Moses, and likewise, Christians who are content to remain powerless. Christ has far more planned for their children who are not content there, but Belle in feminine liberation has taken matters into her own willful hands because she has grown tired of waiting for the Lord to act the way she wants and provide what she desires (like Sarah).
(*13.15) The Wedding Events: Watch the whole “wedding” scene and note its accurate representation of the critical elements of the scriptural and Jewish wedding ceremony of Christ and the Church. But this version shows a Christian virgin who at the moment of proposal has rejected the Christ and he ends up in a mud-puddle, with, of all things, a swine on his head as a mockery that his spurning Christian bride loves pork in spite of his preference to the contrary (Isaiah 66:17), it’s like saying; “you have egg on your face”. We saw earlier a boy gleefully chasing after a swine in town; these are representations that Gentile Christians have taken Christ’s; “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common” (Acts 10:13-16, 28) out of context and excess (Proverbs 23:20-21), and are missing the whole point of his generosity. Deuteronomy 12:15 pretty much identifies a complexity that is today utterly ignored in the; “it’s all clean” perspective of an abandoned law (I Thessalonians 4:7), but even the permissive Deuteronomy verse recognizes a distinction.
(*13.16) The Beast’s Enchanted Castle is most likely the kingdom of Islam, the West Wing is the ugly truth regarding the nature of Islam that they will not permit the world to make public or address in anyway; “it’s forbidden.” What is he hiding there? His utterly destructive uncontrolable violence.
(*13.17) The Enchanted Items are therefore Islam’s troubled "people"/angelics who cannot love him enough to save him; the enchantress said he had “no love in him”…just as a beast. Belle the Christian is the only one that because of her unbeast-like loving Christian nature of Christ’s forgiveness is actually able to “learn to love a Beast,” but as the animation reveals in magnificent song and choreography, she needs the Beast’s people to first draw her in by their warm kindness and encouragement to give him a chance. This is the very purpose and nature of Chrislam; to unite loving Belle and the angry Beast in the City of Babylon. This happens as she gets to know the enchanted dishes as friends.
Am I suggesting we shouldn’t treat them with friendliness? Of course not! (Matthew 5:43-44, Luke 16:9). But there is a difference between friendliness and forgetting whom they serve by becoming friends (James 4:4), you can bet that they don’t (Matthew 6:24).
(*13.18) Evaluation: There will come a day when the existence of God and Satan will no longer be denied. Evidence, science, and facts, will all point to this undeniable truth that scripture pre-tells (Revelation 6:15-16, 19:19). Then Satan will present his argument, no longer that he is God, but that he has been wronged by God. Satan will appeal to our Christian humanity to have Christlike compassion on him by appealing to God for mercy, and many will in fact do so, believing themselves obedient to Christ in forgiveness, and stand with the Beast against God for his presumed unfairness. This is Belle.
Pay specific attention to the Christlike representation of Gaston that amazingly remains intact under the vilification the animators gave him. The danger is that the actual scriptural facts are used, but so twisted in assumed purpose and distasteful motive, that it becomes hard to separate them after seeing it in such light, and utterly impossible for those who don’t know their scriptures or the nature of God.
The Beast enslaved Belle after Gaston made a legitimate attempt to marry her and was shamed by her refusal. I suggest that on the surface onion layer Chrislam might be consummated into power after the rapture, and the church that remains by refusal to go will be Belle. Many will later see the error and return to find Christ but the door will be closed to them (five foolish virgins). But before that day comes Belle is even now consistently building up her disdain for Gaston just as the children of Israel did in the wilderness before the Jordan Decision. Remember, we are speaking of repeating patterns of history.
Gaston, in a desire to help her to marry him, actually planned the incarceration of her father Israel; “I’ve got my heart set on Belle, but she needs a little persuasion.” The scriptures tell us this is indeed technically what transpired (Romans 11:9-21) but in the perspective of this animated presentation they have made it repulsive to us by a forced perspective of partial information and inflection (Romans 11:23-27), yet somehow we have no problem accepting the same wrong idea from the Beast as he negotiates her wonderful captivity without any other alternative motives! The Beast imprisoned her father and required her to remain with him forever to gain his release, and that’s OK because…because that’s what beasts do? But how dare Gaston do such a thing! And in the reverse, as lovers of the Beast, the same argument can be made against Gaston; Why is it OK for Gaston but not for the Beast? This you will have to reason through on your own.
“No people are so good as to rightly govern those without their consent.”
Gaston’s declaration that Belle should spend less time in the fantasy books and more time focused on him is frankly offensive to our liberated ears, but if he is the Type of God the Creator himself, is it not a true and valid statement and a wise recommendation? (Matthew 22:37, II Thessalonians 3:5). As the Creator of all things, is Christ not “the best,” and right in “seeking the best”? And in fact shouldn’t Belle be humbled that such a one would want her at all? And wasn’t Gaston’s proposal that which could have saved her from even meeting the Beast to be captured by and then confused to fall in love with her captor? Were the town’s people not accurate to call it sin that she desired to leave the faith (provincial town)? All this is true.
The problem is that Belle just didn’t want it. And as evidenced by reactions from women today while pursued by men they despise; that’s everything! They may despise it in another but would swoon at the exact same thing from a man they adore. Gaston did not force her to be with him, as did the Beast, though her refusal greatly affected him. Yet he did lock her away to protect her from herself (Hosea 2:6) and then went off to kill the Beast that beguiled her.
I notice that while we are supposed to be indignant that Gaston would kill animals, the Beast’s West Wing has both antlers and furs. Again, it’s not about the specific act; it’s about her desire or disdain for the one who acts. And isn’t this everything in faith too? “Is he dangerous?” someone asks Belle of the Beast, “Oh no. He would never hurt anyone” is her reply. But the body-count in the millions tells another story, the poor girl is deluded by an enchanting spell. But doesn’t Christ also have a body-count to consider? Yes he does, and he has his own explanation, which we have covered in part. You see none of this is a matter of right and wrong by our own judgment of evaluation, it’s simply a matter of the “rules” of whichever husband you want to serve. Belle, like Hitler’s girlfriend, chose to serve Satan and there is just nothing anyone can say to now change her mind because from her perspective his rules are righteous because he is her god. And at least she got out of that narrow provincial faith…er… town.
(*13.19) Enough!
I have by no means exhausted these hidden signs of a temporal message that the production team MUST have intended (but I still question that they did), and am pretty sure they didn’t comprehend the deeper spiritual meaning. But if I continue you will become hardened by the impossible to believe implications and mock me for making every chipped teacup into some deep analogy... such as the meaning of vincit que se vincit seen as a banner on the shield of the divided kingdom in the opening window.
No amount of evidence will convince a committed skeptic while this is enough to convince an honest mind.
This animation is very probably the most evil, dangerous presentation of any form of media I have seen until recently! It is keystone to the Beast’s worldview. It glorifies Satan and his kingdom as the true Messiah, but worse, it blasphemes Yeshua Christ...TO CHRISTIANS in a way that they swallow it whole, not knowing what poison of distain they were just fed.
Yet this animation is only exposing what most Christians have already fallen to by “reading” godless books and movies that lead to godless “ideas;…thinking” . Christians do not censor or keep their women (people) from reading; that is Islam’s game. But wisdom does suggest, as did Gaston, that there are things that should not be read as they distract one from attention to Him. The choice is left to the individual, by Jehovah the creator, as a genuinely free creation of God, and so Belle chose.
In editing this post for inclusion into a book I found myself organizing the thoughts better for clarity and in so doing I found things to correct, perfect, and new things to develop, in fact things that I intend to include in future posts. But the things to fix and the new discoveries never came to an end, yet I couldn’t let go of it either, until I dealt with them. And so it continued. The inordinate clinging of this post began to really bother me, until in prayer I realized that this is the nature of the material itself.
Manuer is the waste product that comes from assimilating the nutrients from very needful sustenance. Manure is not that sustenance; it is manure.
But manure has its very useful purpose: to fertilize the seed of new growth (Luke 13:7-9). This post is the spreading of manure over the depleted growing-ground, but the plant life should always be the focus of intent, not the manure. Too much manure is simply a dug heap, with far more nitrogen than good crops of sustenance can use. You don’t grow plants of sustenance on a dung heap.
At this point I am rather sorry I spent so much time editing this post and in so doing making it longer than it was before, but neither do I wish to take the time to revert it back to the original, what is done is done and I have spent long enough is the sewage, and so have you. Let’s let this pile bake a while and move on in the growing of the good plant.
(*14)
The lyrics to all the songs of Beauty and the Beast (http://www.fpx.de/fp/Disney/Lyrics/BeautyAndTheBeast.html)
*
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment
Vile concepts and profanity in comments will not be posted.