|
NoNotTheMindProbe posted:E: Why doesn't the "Christian" movie industry do period pieces about the various revivals and famous preachers in American Evangelical Christianity? Surely that would make for more interesting movies then the hackneyed morality plays they do. Given the production values most evangelical films have, doing anything like this would be way out of their price range. Initially, when the Godfather was being made, Paramount wanted it to take place in the 1970 so it would be cheaper for them to produce, because the moment it becomes a period piece, you have to spend a lot more money. So think about doing the story of Billy Sunday, but with a shoe-string budget. The other problem too is that a lot of these Evangelical preachers don't really have interesting stories, or at least in hands of Evangelical Christianity, can't be interesting. There could never be real conflict, and it would all be reduced down to this Mickey Mouse poo poo that they currently get. Plus, I don't know how much they actually care about what came before them. A lot of the big names in Evangelical Christianity are in it for themselves. Why would they want to prop up some other guy?
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2014 14:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 22:02 |
|
|
I'm confused... is this movie pro-evolution or anti-evolution? Is he going to perform magic tricks? Is Harry Anderson okay? Does he need money? I can cover his dinner. Please, just no more films like this.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Historical in what way? I mean, in terms of actual history, there's not really too much concrete to go on. In terms of Biblical, there's a bunch of options, but I don't know if that's what you're looking for. Pretty much, it's going to be very hard to do a good historical Jesus film without it being boring or just running into roadblocks. Probably the best I can think of is The Life of Brian. I'm not kidding. There's a lot about that movie that's more accurate to how things were in Israel at that time than what most people believe. Like, the scene with all the messiahs preaching and all that. It's true. There were literally lots of messiahs running around because people thought that a messiah would come at that time. And crucifixion wasn't just something that happened to Jesus (a lot of people actually believe this). I mean, yes, there are inaccuracies, like I doubt anyone was doing a song and dance routine up on the cross, but overall, it is a look at that time period.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
Basically, these guys believe there was the Catholic church that was keeping down the true Christians that existed all along. They don't believe they broke away from the church basically.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
Anti-Catholicism isn't that old either. When JFK was running for President, he had to give a speech saying "Hey guys, I'm a Catholic, but don't worry, I won't listen to the pope or let him rule the country through me." And we've still only have had one Catholic president. Of course, nowadays, anti-Catholicism has become less mainstream because we're everywhere. We've become a major part of society, and people realize that we're not some crazed Vatican serving lunatic fringe out to take over the world for the Pope. There's some of that stuff around today. Even on Ok Cupid, there's a question that says "Would you consider dating a Catholic?" And a lot of Christian churches still view Catholics a little warily. One of the things that began to bring down Anti-Catholicism though was the Moral Majority. Basically, these guys were anti-Catholics until they realized that Catholics, while they love their liberal politics, really hate abortion. And since a lot of people can be single issue voters, they decided to embrace Catholics for their anti-abortion politics to bring them over to the Republican side. Before then, most Catholics were firmly Democrats. And you can see the results today. A priest near me actually said "If you voted for Obama, you cannot take communion without confessing" because he was pro-abortion. That's how effective it was.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Simplex posted:I think a lot of that has more to do with an ill-conceived and half-baked attempt by the GOP to capture Latino voters. This was actually all happening in the 70s and 80s. This article goes into the background of how the GOP spent more time trying to appeal to Catholics: http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/23/opinion/stanley-conservatives-catholics/ The Moral Majority was so effective that it was able to get 1/3 of their donations from Catholics.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2014 00:38
|
|
|
Sushi in Yiddish posted:They produced a version in English and Spanish as well: What in God's name compels you to produce loving synth pop and new-wave songs decrying the evils of technology? What's the mind set here? And I love how it gets more and more bizarre as it goes along. At first, you're like "Yay! Love! Oh, don't have sex until marriage. Hey... evolution is a lie..." and then suddenly UPC barcodes are the tool of the devil!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
Sushi in Yiddish posted:It's pretty nuts. The musician who wrote that music was from Fleetwood Mac and worked in the US musical industry for a while. They probably figured that it would be easier to reach international audiences like the Japanese through catchy songs. It's probably not a accident that the first few songs seem completely secular. I know exactly who you are talking about. For those who don't know, that Fleetwood Mac member was Jeremy Spencer. He was one of the original guitarists, and performed with the band in their very early days back when Peter Green was the band leader. However, he left the band when he joined the Family International in 1971. Just basically disappeared. So no, when you're listening to their massive collection of hits, you're not listening to the work of the Family. He was long gone by that time, and the band had become a very different entity. But still. Under Peter Green, the band actually was notable. Even though they had no US hits, they still produced songs like Alabatross, Black Magic Woman (which Santana later covered), and Oh Well Parts 1 and 2. Because he left the band, they had to get Bob Welch, who would start the band towards a poppier track. It was with Mac that he recorded an early version of his big hit, Sentimental Woman. So we can thank the Family International for songs albums like Rumors and Tusk. But yeah. I agree. It's probably not at all an accident. It's a way of getting my attention. I mean, let's face it, if the first song was heard and you didn't know nothing about it, you'd probably think it was a catchy synth-pop song by some no-name band that went nowhere. But knowing that the Family did it just makes it more sinister. And now it's in my head.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
Obviously, the free-spirited woman will say things like "God is everywhere" and "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual." She will also know the ways of the flesh, or at least, know of the ways of the flesh. And she might believe things like "women can work too" or that "Women and men are equals!"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
El Gallinero Gros posted:Could the studio get away with Life of Brian today without a major media firestorm? When South Park did the whole Jesus pooping joke, a lot of people were up in arms because they were making fun of Jesus, so no.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Their siege mentality is an essential part of their identity. Fundamentalists spout that same poo poo even when they control every aspect of a culture or government. They need to believe in their own immanent destruction or else they lose control. Just look at the way cults behave, or North Korea. They don't need to believe in immanent destruction, but more that they are surrounded by enemies. If you look at North Korea, for example, they portray themselves as inevitable victors of the world, it's just that everybody hates them because they are so awesome and Kim Jong Un is like the best leader ever. But don't worry, they'll beat back the foreign invaders. Honestly, it's really just distrust and possibly paranoia. The hard-core Christians just don't trust mainstream society.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
raditts posted:Those are some surprising reactions considering the people in Christian communities who (in my experience) are looking forward to the end of days. I had no idea that anyone was unclear on how that whole thing is supposed to turn out. You're experiences are pretty skewed. The reality is that everyone's experience with Christianity is skewed by the area you grew up in and what you were exposed to. For example, you don't really get that whole "Yay, end of days" vibe from most Catholics. At least, there's not really a large percentage saying "It's going to happen soon." In fact, much of the Catholicism I've been exposed to is focused on doing our best today and living righteously. And it highlights the problem with Christian Media. There's no ubiquitous Christian front. There are your Rod and Todd types, sure. But there are also Christians who are on Something Awful. Stephen Colbert is a devout Catholic in real life. Van Morrison sung both about God and making love in the green grass with a brown eyed-girl. There's just no single Christian identity that permeates throughout our entire culture. There's a very specific branch of Christianity that this media is aimed for. These are the people who lack agency. God is responsible for everything good in their life, such as the pizza arriving in 30 minutes or less, or for your favorite movie being on the TV, and blame the devil for everything bad, like when your pizza doesn't have the loving pepperoni you loving ordered and explicitly asked for, or when your favorite movie is preempted because of a sporting event. That's why a lot of Christian media is very simple in this black and white way. God makes everything good, and if it isn't, then you just got to pray harder. But for a lot of Christians out there, that's bullshit. That's not the way they view their life. When I go to one of my friends, who comes from a very deeply Baptist background, for advice, she doesn't start preaching at me. She has yet to tell me that I need to pray more. Her advice is based on reality. Except when she tells me that I should get a girlfriend. Which inevitably turns into her complaining about how long she's been single and how she hasn't had a date in forever. It's like, how am I supposed to help her with... poo poo. I'll finish this post later guys. I may have had a revelation.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
DStecks posted:The pinnacle of Christian music, and perhaps Christian media in general: That's the least enthusiastic "Move your body/ c'mon y'all" I've ever heard. Beyond that... I'm just amazed that somebody can make music that is so tuneless and rhythmless that it defies all understanding. Like, how do you not hear the obvious problems. Also, I'm convinced the first verse is just a list of his sexual conquests.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
I thin a few things are really helping Christian films get big. First off, the end of 35mm film as the distribution method is a big boon. Basically, printing thousands of copies of your film onto film is pretty expensive, and it's expensive to ship and expensive to produce. It just adds a lot of money to the cost of getting your film out there. And chances are for a lot of theaters, since these are niche films, they're able to show these films more readily since they don't have to worry about having a film print. Also, a lot of theaters in general are bringing in more niche and independent films to more local theaters. Digital distribution is also something that helped out. Before, a lot of these films were only available in Christian bookstores, so if you wanted them, you had to go and look for them. Now, once again, you can get it on Netflix. You can easily get it to theaters. You can get it in the same storespace as super awesome superhero film #33. Also, the fact that getting buzz is different today than it has been in the past has also helped out a bit. I mean, think about the year 2000. There wasn't Facebook or Youtube or Netflix or anything like that. Now, you can do a lot more marketing to interested people and be more successful. Also, the fact that a lot of these movies don't look like rear end also helps. Like, look at Fireproof (aka, the Christian Don Jon... and probably much more entertaining to watch). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzXI8W6_uTs Just look. It looks cheap. It feels cheap. It's like the second season of Andy Richter Controls the Universe when they switched from film to HD Video. It's just cheap. Compare it God's Not Dead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc5s1ZKNmcc That looks like a film. It looks like it was shot by people who know how to make a movie look like a movie and not... a low grade pornography film. I also think that there's more attempt to be... well, better. Let's face it. Fireproof isn't going to appeal to anyone who lives in the real world. "YOU DISRESPECTFUL, UNGRATEFUL, SELFISH WOMAN!" I mean come on. Is that something anybody would say? Go back to God's Not Dead. It's a lot closer than Fireproof. It's still reflective of a bizarre worldview, but let's put it this way. Kevin Sorbo is an actor who is miles ahead of Kirk Cameron. Finally, I think as ticket sales go down and attendance patterns change, movie studios are trying to go after any market they can. They view Christians as hungry for material, and so they're hoping they can make Christian films that will get some families to show up too.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
Hey man, who can remember countries like Gabon, or East Timor, or Tuvalu. I mean, seriously. Wikipedia can name all of them. Guys, if Wikipedia asks me to join the one world republic, I'm there.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
KingsPawn posted:Yeah, but even then, why so many bad movies?! I would totally be fine with watching Christian films through the lens of an Afghani, Chinese, Russian or Deep-South Appalachian director. It just seems like the evangelicals are making things too cliché and too easy. It just smells of low effort. I would not be surprised if the people making these films are running a scheme like Mel Brooks imagined in the Producers. Here's the thing - the type of people that are making these films have a cliched and easy understanding of Christianity. Follow the Bible, and everything will work out just right. If the Evangelical religion lacks subtext and subtlety, why would you expect their films to be anything but the most hollow of tripe? The other thing too is that they're making films cheaply to try and make their message bluntly. Like, there was some film somebody linked here about a girl with a terminal disease, and the best part was on Christmas morning, where she comes down stairs all bright and chipper, and is like "Can I open a present," and then the next thing you know, she's under the tree, dead! It's just cheap and sappy and utterly ridiculous. But they're happy because she's with God!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 04:17
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:Even worse, the logical inconsistencies are intentional and exist to reinforce the evangelical persecution complex. They don't want to know how it really works, it's easier to see the world in this adversarial manner instead. The reality is that Evangelicals have a very simplistic worldview, and that just doesn't make for great entertainment, especially when you're trying to deal with a film that's supposed to be a philosophical battle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc5s1ZKNmcc These are the argument scenes from God's Not Dead. They are almost totally unwatchable because there is no flow of ideas. The professor's role is there to basically be glib and just say "Yeah, that's nice, but come on! Seriously?" It would be like watching a Rocky movie where he goes up against kids or quadriplegics, or quadriplegic kids. You know the kid isn't going to be swayed by the professor's words. The professor is well spoken, but he's a complete idiot. Incapable of actual thought. And you know what - the audience sees this. But they don't care. Because these films aren't made to entertain or even evangelize. They're made to pump up the base. They're made to allow them to see their fantasy played out. They're the smart powerful ones and the other guys are the idiots. There's no introspection. The film was made because the filmmaker was concerned by how many Christians go to four-year colleges and yet, don't remain Christians upon leaving. And instead of really exploring why that is, instead, they just simply say "Well, they are made to!" They don't understand atheism (I'll argue that they also don't understand Christ or science or anything beyond simple English). How can you make a good film about a conflict between religion and atheism without understanding the core conflict? It's not that Christian messages are anathema to good films. There are plenty of great films with Christian messages and themes. Take Gran Torino. Catholicism plays a central role to that story. But it works so well because there are shades of grey. It's not just the good priest clashing with the mean old racist. There's some issues with the priest as well. It feels real because there's a real conflict that is representative of reality at it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:From what I'm getting, Catholics tend to be better at making films with explicitly Christian messages. Could that be because most Catholics in the US are relatively recent immigrants (like from last 100 years) and live on the East or West coasts and the evangelicals are all clustered in flyover country so it's more a rural vs. urban divide than anything inherent to the religions themselves? There's a bunch of things going on. Now, I will say this - Catholics are pretty varied. You got people like Rick Santorum, who basically are pretty much evangelicals, and then you also got people like Stephen Colbert. Both of them are devout Catholics, but they are also vastly different Catholics (I think a lot of people are surprised to hear that Colbert is an active Catholic). Hell, I heard the lead singer of Slayer is a Catholic. If you can sing lead for Slayer and be a Catholic, you can see how wide things go. First off, Catholicism has a pretty deep history of intellectualism. For example, you have people like Saint Thomas Aquinas, who even if you disagree with him, at least put a lot of thought into his discourses on morality and Catholicism. It's one of those things, if you're really going to dig in deep to Catholicism, you're probably going to encounter this element of the religion. Secondly, it feels like there's a bit more mysticism than there would be in Evangelical churches. There's a lot of talk about mystery. There are people who like the Latin mass because it feels more mystical to them. Thirdly, there is an emphasis on trying to be more integrated with the people. You can see it especially with this current pope, but that's a big thing in Catholicism. It's not supposed to be insular and closed off. There is this idea about engagement. Fourthly, Catholicism doesn't necessarily try to make everything about God. I went to a Catholic high school, and with the exception of our theology class, God was kept out of the classroom. We learned about evolution, to the point where we actually discussed the people around Darwin who were proposing similar ideas (yeah, it wasn't just Darwin coming in saying 'WE COME FROM MONKEYS,' there were other people reaching similar conclusions). We read books like Catcher in the Rye. There are denominations that will try to make everything about God. Like, the people in Jesus Camp, for example. Fifthly, Catholicism does not preach Bible literalism. I'm sure there are Catholics out there who feel that way, we're open to the idea that certain parts might be allegorical or didn't happen exactly the way it said it did. So, we don't get hung up on Genesis because we're willing to say "that's not how it actually happened." Sixth, you have the Jesuits. Need I say more about them? Seventh, there's more structure to the Catholic church. To be a priest, you have to have a certain level of education, you have to take certain vows, you answer to a Bishop. There's more control over the message, where if I wanted to start a Baptist church, I can just start one up. Which also controls some of the bullshit beliefs you see in other churches. I know some people will point to transubstantiation, but at least that's a more quiet "insanity." We're not holding poisonous snakes or babbling and saying that we're speaking in tongues. Finally, there's a lot of tolerance for struggling within the Catholic church. I remember I had this gung-ho theology teacher. He was as deep into Jesus as any person could be without being certifiably insane. He was discussing communion, and he said it's okay to take communion if you don't know if you believe. I think that final point is a big thing. It seems like a lot of Christian films depict a struggle as either you believe entirely or you just don't believe at all. There's no concept of wanting to believe but being troubled by what you see. Hell, the Simpsons handles Christian themes much better than explicitly Christian movies. If Ned Flanders can have a believable crisis of faith, then there's no excuse for what Kirk Cameron does.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:I feel like biblical literalism is not as much of a problem if you're using it to get an interesting plot and setting for your movie rather than trying to justify the death penalty for mixing wool and flax. God's Not Dead is an example of chain-e-mail literalism in that sense, I guess. Yeah. I mean, telling the stories in the Bible isn't really literalism, at least in the sense that we mean it. Otherwise, we might as well accuse Walt Disney of fairy tale literalism when he made Seven Whites and the Snow Dwarfs.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Here's the whole thing on youtube, if you dare: My god, this thing is incoherent. It just jumps around with no clear purpose or direction and wastes so much time that as an adult who can watch a film like Lawrence of Arabia, I lost the ability to focus on this. I can't imagine a child being more successful.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:Why is the old man dressed like Doug Funny? I believe the question was already answered by the above post: Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:This looks like the beginning to a really really weird porno
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
DeusExMachinima posted:2God2Undead Oh God... Ray Wise, please tell me everything's okay. Are you hungry? Are you missing house payments? Why would they put Leland Palmer from Twin Peaks into this unholy abortion of a film? Granted, it's impossible to take this film seriously at all. It only makes sense if you live in some weird alternate reality where something like this would actually happen. Nobody is going to completely poo poo on you just because you mention Jesus.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
Grendels Dad posted:"Die Bibel ist ein Märchenbuch" (The Bible is a book of fairy-tales) is all over my city as graffiti, and I can never not think "Yeah, so?" It's sad that this is a statement Christians would find problematic, or that atheists think this is such a sick burn that they have to put it everywhere. I do find it problematic. It's inaccurate. The Bible has poetry, philosophical discourses, and histories in it. I find most people who aggressively push for their world view to be kind of sad, since all they do is miss the bigger picture and sound like children.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
RC and Moon Pie posted:Pat Boone is famous entirely because he was the nice, clean white boy of rock and roll. He didn't understand Tutti Frutti, but since he was the safe alternative, his version ascended higher on the charts. He also wrote this fantastically cheesy book called Twist Twelve and Twenty that seems to show some obsession with spanking. Wow, this is the whitest music ever. Like, if you were to distill whiteness into music, this is what you would get. This is the musical equivalent of the suburban dad who's idea of letting loose on a Saturday evening is cracking open a coke and watching a PG rated film where they might use some vulgarity and maybe some suggestive themes. There's a hint of wildness, but it's restrained and kept entirely in check. It's just so tame, it's bizarre. I've never heard Pat Boone sing before this, and now, I can say I know why. I'm digging into some of his other catalogs, and yeah. It's like he's crossing rock with crooning, but he just saps every song of its energy, until what is left is this weird shriveled husk of a song that hints at rock but just sounds wrong. Please, someone tell me that they burned the master tapes and buried the records. I don't want future civilizations hearing this.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
Guy Mann posted:The movie was such a bomb that the only positive quote they could get for the cover of the DVD was one from Ben Stein himself: I imagine it's meant to be humor, since Stein is a comedic actor. I don't think they were like "Well, Ben Stein liked it, let's put it on there." Of course, that doesn't make the movie any better, since it's all pretty stupid. But still.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
What, these Nazis used evolution, therefore intelligent design is true is not a coherent argument? And yes, that is what Ben Stein, noted economist who did not see the 2009 financial crisis looming, said.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:More on the thread topic, a interesting what if movie would be a world without Christianity. Good luck getting that made without being full dumbass evangelical or maximum fedora, though. It's be tough to look at the modern age just because so much had happened, but you could look at the fall of the Roman Empire. The challenge is that removing the church means you have to account for the massive influence the Pope played on history. For example, what would the Reformation look like if there was no Catholic Church? That's not to say nature wouldn't find another way, but it's hard to say what would have happened. The farther you get away from Rome, the more variables you had to play with. Maybe we'd all be speaking Mandarin.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Robotnik Nudes posted:I like to think that David AR White and Kirk Cameron are bitter rivals and have major Christian movie beef. They both make movies for Christ, but they can't stand reach others guts. What happens when God decides they should make a film together. God sees to it that hijinks ensue, praise Jesus.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:Based on your description, you might enjoy Roland Joffé's The Mission, in which a group of Jesuits try to establish a mission in the jungles of Paraguay, but come into conflict with official Church politics. Other interesting films with members of the Catholic clergy as main characters are The Club about a group of priests whom the Church hides from the outside world due to their sins, The Flowers of St. Francis about the challenges faced by Francis of Assisi and his religious order, and Monsieur Vincent, the biography of the priest Vincent de Paul, who dedicated himself to serving the poor. Another film that covers concepts of faith is "Gran Turino." Catholicism plays a major role in the film, at least in terms of themes. Central to the film is the idea of redemption and what does it mean to do the right thing? In many ways, Clint Eastwood's Walt sets us up for our modern time. He's a former soldier, he's a gun owner, he's not afraid to take action and wave his weapon around, and he's played by Clint Eastwood, famous for playing guys like Dirty Harry who had trouble accepting that he couldn't just torture suspected criminals without facing repercussions. So how the film deals with the rape and assault of the teenage daughter of the Hmong family is massively important. Instead of going in with guns blazing, he instead sacrifices himself. A key element in the film is the priest's attempts at connecting with Walt. In the beginning of the film, the eulogy the priest gives is trite and meaningless: "Death is bittersweet to us Catholics." Walt even makes fun of him for it. But at the end of the film, the priest has connected with Walt, and when giving the eulogy, he starts off with a personal story that's a little off color: "He called me a 27-year-old over educated virgin." Once again, the idea of faith is not "god is going to tell me what to do," but rather, it's something inward that helps me make the right decision.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2016 06:15
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:I never read it as such when watching it. Faith was just something to pop up here and there and try to sway Walt from his old timers fail-to-adapt-to-change and be the occasional comedic relief. He just takes a shining to the Hmongs and realises that the kids he's come to love can never really be free until the gang is dealt with and he knew there was no real way one guy was going to stand up to them. They're definitely comedic moments, and they're played up for laughs, but that doesn't mean it is just there to lighten the mood. The priest plays a major enough role in the film, and it's bookended by the eulogies, that it is hard not to see it play an element in the film. You can even trace their relationship. Walt goes from being openly antagonistic to the priest, to feeling comfortable enough with him to go to confession. He wasn't even going to mass before, and he basically did the church thing because of his wife. So to seek out confession shows that he is changing. Walt can't even tell his own son he's sick. It's quite clear that Walt isn't very emotionally intimate with many people. And the priest comes to Walt's level too, even saying that he'd love a beer. It's not like Million Dollar Baby, which also features a priest, but ultimately, faith isn't really a core component of that film.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
basic hitler posted:Satan as depicted in the bible is that of a tempter and tester of men's souls. A few years back i specifically looked up every reference to him and its amazingly scant and what's there is hardly enough to justify the popular perception of him. Im not saying Satan's secretly a good guy just there's not any real biblical justification for what we believe, although maybe there's more apocryphal references that flesh out the origins of the rear end in a top hat devil we know. I haven't read any Jewish apocrypha but the gnostic stuff has satan as an obedient servant of the demiurge It's the power of duality. What's interesting is how there is this subset of Christians who want to destroy the concept of free will. To them, God and Satan are active forces, and everything is a result of their meddling in people's lives. God will send you the money, Satan will give you cancer. Even in that Carman video, depression is a result of Satan. It removes people from the equation, or it makes us an essential part of the grand universal plan. It also helps avoid the Why Do Bad Things Happen To Good People question, because Satan sent that hurricane.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 22:02 |
|
|
The Parent's Television Council is a hilarious group. L. Brent Bozell III used to run the group, and you all know what a piece of work that man is. They've seemed to slow down recently, but maybe I just didn't look in the right places. There are a few problems with this. 1. The main problem is distribution. You can't just resell someone else's work. 2. Hollywood doesn't typically offer censored versions of their movies for sale because the number of people who like Star Wars but thinks it has too much sex is a very small group. 3. Jingle All the Way? Seriously. That's a movie you've edited and are advertising?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 06:17
|
|