Well, psuedo intellectual and quasi religious/political inferences aside, I am going to watch it.
It wouldn't be the first time I've gone to see crap if it does end up sucking. (I mean, a shitty Sundance Film Festival movie or a shitty Hollywood movie.. it's all the same to me.)
There is nothing intellectual, pseudo-intellectual or even remotely intellectual about anything I say.
And to anyone who loves this movie and thinks I am a mean-spirited atheist bastard, @#%$ you. I hate you. I hate everything you stand for. Go frolick in a field of daisies you motherfuckers. I hate you all.
Woah, dude. Talk about total complete 100% opposites.
I dont see what the heck everyone's problem is with this movie. Its merely stating the truth. Its obviously over-violent, but apparently thats all anybody cares about.
Im not going to smack you all over the head with pacifist views. However...
I'm sorry, but i find Theren Gevel extremely funny. I mean, you are so totally anti-christianity and anti-theworld, but it seems to me that everything you say that ISNT biosed anti-christianity goes FOR what christianity belives in. At least, that is, presbiterian-congregationalism. I really think, Theren, that you should study presbiterian/congregationalism views, they seem to me to be the same as yours. I mean, the whole help-the-poor-i-am-liberal... This i do not know at all: but i dare say you are even bordering on being a pacifist? I mean, you certainy must hate bush... right?
I hope i wont just get a stream of useless insults back. And i hope i didnt offend anybody too much. O yeah, and no i'm NOT trying to convert you.
(If i assumed everything that you thought wrongly, just kill me now)
'The Truth'? Maybe accurate according to the current translation of the Bible, but whether or not it is actually 'true' is up debate. I'm not questioning whether Jesus actually existed or not, but the fact is, is that the Bible has been retranslated/rewritten many times over the course of time. The more you copy something...the more 'errors' that get introduced into it: no doubt that some of those errors were done on purpose due to the political and social influences at the time. Example a passage from the Old Testment (forgive me, I do not know the 'exact' wording as...it is from the book where Sodom and Gamora were destroyed):
Older version of the passage: "Bring them out so that we may get to know them."
The 'current' version: "Bring them out so that we may have sex with them."
Quite a difference eh? Some where along the line...someone interpeted the phase 'to know' to mean 'to have sex' back then. Here in lies the problem: each new 'writer' interpets the Word in his/her own way and copies it accordingly. The result: Over time...the original meaning is lost.
*realizes what she just got herself into...puts on a flame retardent suit*
Im not saying that they know exactly what jesus said or anything. However, the message is exactly the same.
The Bible is NOT meant to be taked word-for-word either. Only fundies belive that the world started with a couple of people, and that the arc of the covenent killed tons of people.
Bullshit. Either you're not entirely sure what I stand for, or you're acting like liberalism is a Christian invention, which it isn't. Modern conservatism -- George Bush's conservatism -- is the Christian invention. Since Christianity is the status quo in the west and right-wing thinking is tied to the preservation of the status quo more than any other political stance, it is logical to assume that it is the option more closely associated with Christianity.
In America, any level of liberalism or socialism has long been associated with communism, and communism with atheism -- communism being the Devil in American politics. They were bundled together into one very Satanic package by McCarthy and they continue to be lumped as such by his modern-day disciples, of which there are several on this board alone.
The assumption that I am uneducated with regards to Christian ideals and views is wholly wrong. It is only because I am so very acquainted with Christianity that I can reject it so confidently.
Slaskia
To be fair, it also states in Genesis that Adam "knew" his wife and this produced Cain. So I think it is safe to assume that "know" is a euphemism for carnal knowledge.
I dislike homophobia as much as anyone -- in fact I've probably written more words fighting with Kas on this issue than some of you have in the sum total of all of your posts on TRF. But to defend the history of Christianity as not homophobic is to deny what is plainly in front of you. There are a lot of kooky things in the Bible, about slavery and killing gay people and stoning anyone who swears. If you want to be a Christian in the modern world I suggest you accept this and move on, or you will drive yourself insane.
There is very little debate over the actual events of Christ's crucifixion. Though of course when you are working with a document written decades after the event making a movie on the basis of historical fidelity is preposterous, it probably gets the gist of it.
