And bred 13s the Oscar for Best Image of God in a motion picture goes to

A long time ago, in a desert far, far away, Moses scaled a mountain called Sinai in order to bring God's law to God's people. God's message included proscriptions about not making or worshiping images of anything on heaven, earth, or sea. This had to do with God's exclusive ability to create life, but also with a particular "image of God" understood to be solely invested in the form of humans (see ). Coincidentally, Moses' brother Aaron was in the valley below forging a golden calf for the people to worship.

What then should we make of the golden statuette called "Oscar"? An icon for the Academy Awards, the trophy is an image of a human body presented to the best filmmakers representing human life through cinema. Those aren't the award's requirements, but that's the way it is: A golden image, given to image makers. Humans are "God's Oscars," we might say. We are deep into theological territory here.

The films of 2009 explored the image of the human, and thus the image of God, in an unprecedented way. Lewis, humans have long asked: Are we alone? Are there humans, goddesses, or some other unknown creatures on other planets?

James Cameron's big budgeted Avatar mixes genetic manipulation and an interstellar journey to ponder whether humans can become aliens. Reactions have ranged from outrage at the film's "pantheism," to criticizing the great white savior that emerges in the narrative. Not to disregard those interests, the film also portrays a bio technology that transcends physical disability, allowing the lame to walk, and pondering: Can a human soul step into another life form? Is the soul found in DNA?

In contrast, Neill Blomkamp's District 9 displays neither gods nor particularly attractive mortal beings who come down to earth. (Would you rather be a "Na'vi" or a "Prawn"?) In a post apartheid allegory, the alien invader genre ( la Independence Day, War of the Worlds) is rearranged in District 9 to show human alien interconnections. The segue between life forms makes this an interesting story. As with Avatar, Homo sapiens is transformed into another species via DNA manipulation, and in so doing saves not just humanity, but other species as well.

While Roland Emmerich and other filmmakers focus on the catastrophic end of the world, as in last year's 2012, something strange always happens: a remnant always remains. From The Matrix to The Terminator, Blade Runner to WALL E, films have long suggested a post apocalyptic future in which humans and robots are engaged in ongoing battle.

One 2009 film that didn't make the Oscar nominations nonetheless does more than others to push the limits of what it is to be human. Shane Acker's 9 asks: What happens after the end of humanity, now that the machines have taken over? In 9, there are no more humans. The species called Homo sapiens may have been a blip on screen of existence, just as the Creator scientist states at the beginning, "Life must go on." This is a rare approach to a film narrative. There is here no Neo, Rick Deckard, or Captain McCrea. Just some robots in funny little puppet suits who might continue life as animated creatures. The premise and promise of the film is that good and evil, and life itself, may go on, but humans will have no part in the battle.

Animals, Action Heroes, and Humans:

We could also question the limits of the human by looking at big feature films released in 2009 like Ponyo and The Princess and the Frog, as they question the difference between humans and other animals. These are natural queries to be sure, as they help us think through our desires in and through this mortal coil. Yet, with ongoing biological studies about the communications, empathy, and tool using skills of other animals, the gap between the human and non human is growing ever narrower.

In another direction we can look to our ongoing lust for superheroes, seen most directly in Watchmen, but in a more down to earth way in The Hurt Locker and Inglourious Basterds. Herein, mortal humans carry out more than human activities in order to continue the life of humans. Ordinary humans become heroes, and heroes quickly become superheroes in the quest for transcendence.

Aliens and apocalypses, action heroes and animals, have been subjects of films for decades. Yet, collectively and increasingly, the mass media leaves us wondering about the edges of jordan 13 bred the human. So much attention to the question "What are humans?" might in itself show that we are reaching our ends. Maybe space invaders or global warming, an interspecies or cybernetic hybrid here on earth, will make us other than we presently are.

At the same time, if the major Western monotheistic religious traditions claim that we are made in the "image of God," then theologically one must wonder about the possibly evolving nature of humans, and thus, even, of God's own nature. Does God evolve with us? Can "God's image" include human animal hybrids, cyber people, or even the end of humans as we know them? Does the "end of humans" spell the end of God? A new creation?

S. Brent Plate is visiting associate professor of religious studies at Hamilton College. His column, "Pop eye," appears occasionally in Religion Dispatches. His recent books include "Religion and Film: Cinema and the Re Creation of the World"; "Blasphemy: Art that Offends."

I really hope that the library system Spidermean uses to post his deranged rants from eventually bars him. It might. One suspects his concept of hygiene is as repulsive as his concept of "God."

And he's pretty much hijacked any chance at meaningful discussion of anything having to do with faith, religion or the Divine. Anyone who wants to try has to step around the numerous verbal turds that Spidermean drops every two or three posts. Such a shame. They have no smelling capability and no brain to critique their smell. Yet they are perfectly plesant to smell. The chemical process is not that easy coz if it is, then people could easily make perfumes from soil and water plus the sun. How is it possible that they can be makers of fragrant scents without a highly intelligent being behind it?

Prove me wrong in bred 13s 2013 my assertion that you guys are no match with my analytical thinking skills.

That question is ORIGINAL coming from a true thinking engineer. The science of metamorphosis. It's is an engineering marvel which can't be duplicated by any scientist or engineer even in theoretical methods like computer simulations. How then can butterflies metamorphose without a highly intelligent being behind it?

Prove me wrong in my assertion that you guys are no match with my analytical thinking skills.

That question is ORIGINAL coming from a true thinking engineer. etc. I pharrrt on all this nonsense and the idiotic idea of the invisible man in the sky. But in our culture we pretend that this idiocy is praiseworthy and something to revere, so there was no comment section to today's article that homeschooling books are written by people with a creationist agenda. The WaPo doesn't want to see the religious bred 13s for sale cretins dumped on.

What unbelievable KHRAP religion is, a true product of the self important, inflated ape brain that fancies itself the center of the universe. I am sorry to belong to such a hubristic, self important species. I have just apologized to my cat who manages to conduct his life in a perfectly reasonable manner, unlike the puffed up, swollen headed ape with his god fantasies and nonsense ideas of "eternal life." Such trash.

First, MGM's art director Cedric Gibbons, one of the original Academy members, supervised the design of the award trophy by printing the design on a scroll. In need of a model for his statuette Gibbons was introduced by his then wife Dolores del Ro to Mexican film director Emilio "El Indio" Fernndez. Reluctant at first, Fernndez was finally convinced to pose nude to create what today is known as the "Oscar". Hardly a rational Golden Calf analogy.

Second, why might we say humans are God's Oscars? For what reason other than taking a trip down the road of fantasy.