moviefreakedmind

imperialscum said:
normal sex.

That’s transphobic.

The prequels strike me as partially live-action animes.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Back in the '60s & '70s, if you wanted a superhero of colour or wanted to give a white superhero a significant other of colour, you’d create new characters to fill those roles.

Now in the 2000s, if you want a superhero of colour or want to give a white superhero a significant other of colour, you take pre-existing characters who were white and race-swap them.

Progress!

Shaft needs to be played by a fat white lady from St. Louis.

My point is that you would have way of determining which are embellishments. People who take it all as truth have a sturdier worldview.

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

Really?

Forgive my ignorance (not being sarcastic here) but what is the basis for getting into Heaven?

Repentance. Believing that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, who died, was buried, and was resurrected. In theory, if Mother Theresa didn’t believe that, but my lazy ass did, I’d go to heaven and she’d go to hell.

If this was the only brand of Christianity around, I’d probably be anti-Christian.

Thank God there’s moderate, progressive, and liberal Christianity, though.

Also known as unbiblical Christianity.

With these three options to choose from:

1. Take the Bible at 100% face value and worship a vengeful, manipulative, bipolar, murderous God.
2. Take the Bible at 100% face value and reject God altogether
3. Recognize the Bible as a flawed product of man, separate the wheat from the chaff, and worship a fair, merciful, loving God

I’ll go with #3 every time.

Maybe, I just don’t see the value of a religious text (I’m not religious by the way; I just read it like a book, I find it interesting) that is flawed. How do you know which parts are the inspired ones?

Since most Christians say that their faith is based on Christ, I suggest Christians do exactly that. Take the four canonical gospels, glean the central spiritual and moral teachings of Christ from them, and then evaluate the rest of the Bible – the Old Testament and the remaining portions of the New Testament both – through that lens. Where the Bible is compatible with Christ’s teachings, accept it; where the Bible is incompatible with Christ’s teachings, regard it as inconsequential and don’t follow it; where the Bible is neutral in regard to Christ’s teachings, use your discretion to come to a conclusion.

How do you know that the gospels are legitimate if the other 62 books are not?

I wouldn’t use the word “legitimate”; that implies they’re 100% factual records of Jesus’ life and ministry, without any inaccuracies/embellishments/etc. I don’t think the gospels are that at all. However, in lieu of travelling back in time to c. 27-36 AD and getting the word straight from the horse’s mouth, I think they’re the best source we have available on the man and his teachings.

If you think that the miracles/claims to be God are embellishments then that is at least 85-90% of the gospels.

thejediknighthusezni said:
The NT isn’t nearly as incompatible with the OT as you seem to think.

Now this I actually will agree with.

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

Really?

Forgive my ignorance (not being sarcastic here) but what is the basis for getting into Heaven?

Repentance. Believing that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, who died, was buried, and was resurrected. In theory, if Mother Theresa didn’t believe that, but my lazy ass did, I’d go to heaven and she’d go to hell.

If this was the only brand of Christianity around, I’d probably be anti-Christian.

Thank God there’s moderate, progressive, and liberal Christianity, though.

Also known as unbiblical Christianity.

With these three options to choose from:

1. Take the Bible at 100% face value and worship a vengeful, manipulative, bipolar, murderous God.
2. Take the Bible at 100% face value and reject God altogether
3. Recognize the Bible as a flawed product of man, separate the wheat from the chaff, and worship a fair, merciful, loving God

I’ll go with #3 every time.

Maybe, I just don’t see the value of a religious text (I’m not religious by the way; I just read it like a book, I find it interesting) that is flawed. How do you know which parts are the inspired ones?

Since most Christians say that their faith is based on Christ, I suggest Christians do exactly that. Take the four canonical gospels, glean the central spiritual and moral teachings of Christ from them, and then evaluate the rest of the Bible – the Old Testament and the remaining portions of the New Testament both – through that lens. Where the Bible is compatible with Christ’s teachings, accept it; where the Bible is incompatible with Christ’s teachings, regard it as inconsequential and don’t follow it; where the Bible is neutral in regard to Christ’s teachings, use your discretion to come to a conclusion.

How do you know that the gospels are legitimate if the other 62 books are not?

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

Really?

Forgive my ignorance (not being sarcastic here) but what is the basis for getting into Heaven?

Repentance. Believing that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, who died, was buried, and was resurrected. In theory, if Mother Theresa didn’t believe that, but my lazy ass did, I’d go to heaven and she’d go to hell.

If this was the only brand of Christianity around, I’d probably be anti-Christian.

Thank God there’s moderate, progressive, and liberal Christianity, though.

Also known as unbiblical Christianity.

With these three options to choose from:

1. Take the Bible at 100% face value and worship a vengeful, manipulative, bipolar, murderous God.
2. Take the Bible at 100% face value and reject God altogether
3. Recognize the Bible as a flawed product of man, separate the wheat from the chaff, and worship a fair, merciful, loving God

I’ll go with #3 every time.

Maybe, I just don’t see the value of a religious text (I’m not religious by the way; I just read it like a book, I find it interesting) that is flawed. How do you know which parts are the inspired ones?

Possessed said:

moviefreakedmind said:

RicOlie_2 said:

TV’s Frink said:

Does it make the opposite clear, that faith with nothing else is all that is needed?

It explicitly says the opposite, actually. According to some people’s interpretations, it does, but the Letter of James says:

“What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? […] So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.”

Dead faith is still faith nonetheless. James refers to works being the evidence of faith. Works have nothing to do with salvation according to the New Testament.

Wrong.

Ephesians 2:8-10

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Christians are supposed to do good works, but it isn’t what “saves” them.

Fang Zei said:

Wasn’t it reported somewhere back around December that Disney had in fact requested a copy of the LoC’s original '77 print of the film?

As I recall, the prevailing theory was that they could very well be using it as reference for what the actual content of the initial theatrical release actually was.

Yes, I posted that here. The colorist who posts on the Steve Hoffman Forums said that. I believe him more than most other people regarding Star Wars information. It’s also possible that they just wanted to consolidate files of all of their existing material, or something. It’s a good sign, but it’s not a guarantee.

DuracellEnergizer said:

That is not dead which can eternal lie. And with strange aeons even death may die.

I have no voice yet I must scream!

RicOlie_2 said:

TV’s Frink said:

Does it make the opposite clear, that faith with nothing else is all that is needed?

It explicitly says the opposite, actually. According to some people’s interpretations, it does, but the Letter of James says:

“What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? […] So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.”

Dead faith is still faith nonetheless. James refers to works being the evidence of faith. Works have nothing to do with salvation according to the New Testament.

DuracellEnergizer said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

Really?

Forgive my ignorance (not being sarcastic here) but what is the basis for getting into Heaven?

Repentance. Believing that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, who died, was buried, and was resurrected. In theory, if Mother Theresa didn’t believe that, but my lazy ass did, I’d go to heaven and she’d go to hell.

If this was the only brand of Christianity around, I’d probably be anti-Christian.

Thank God there’s moderate, progressive, and liberal Christianity, though.

Also known as unbiblical Christianity.

TV’s Frink said:

Does it make the opposite clear, that faith with nothing else is all that is needed?

Yes, but it also stipulates that unrepentant licentiousness implies that you probably aren’t truly a believer anyway. It’s also pretty specific on the Jesus Christ described in the New Testament, and none other. Another Jesus is no Jesus.

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

Really?

Forgive my ignorance (not being sarcastic here) but what is the basis for getting into Heaven?

Repentance. Believing that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, who died, was buried, and was resurrected. In theory, if Mother Theresa didn’t believe that, but my lazy ass did, I’d go to heaven and she’d go to hell.

I didn’t think that was true.

The Bible makes real clear that works without faith is of no value.

TV’s Frink said:

Really?

Forgive my ignorance (not being sarcastic here) but what is the basis for getting into Heaven?

Repentance. Believing that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, who died, was buried, and was resurrected. In theory, if Mother Theresa didn’t believe that, but my lazy ass did, I’d go to heaven and she’d go to hell.

Lord Haseo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Lord Haseo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Lord Haseo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Living according to Catholic teachings is doing a heck of a lot. Take a look at Mother Theresa, for example. For most people, it just means trying to make the lives of everyone else around you better, in simple ways, but even then, it’s only nothing if you’re not really trying…

Other than not having sex before marriage and just being a decent person in general I don’t think living by those tenets is a particularly difficult challenge.

You’ve boiled Christianity down to just about nothing, and if you see it that way, it’s no wonder it seems easy. Even simple things, like being friendly with someone who’s a jerk to you, or performing random acts of kindness whenever the opportunity shows itself are easier said than done.

Volunteering in soup kitchens; protesting unjust laws; doing every chore, school assignment, and task at your job to the best of your ability; donating a sizeable amount of what you earn to charity; being cheerful even when your day has been crappy; cleaning the toilets so another family member doesn’t have to do it instead; sacrificing your time to help an acquaintance – or a stranger – with some difficulty; visiting people in the old folks home or the hospital just to cheer them up; taking the time to talk (cheerfully, sympathetically, and patiently) to that person who just won’t leave you alone and feels the desparate need to tell you their life story; or not getting angry at the guy who cuts you off in traffic are just a few of the things that every good Christian should do consistently, so far as they are able. Do I do them all? No. Most of them, yes, but it is very difficult to take time out of your schedule and visit strangers, or to not be irritable when you’re having a bad day, so as not to make it a bad day for other people.

Being kind to someone who wronged you is hard I admit but that depends on the person. Also “easier said than done” does not equate to “difficult”. It’s only difficult if you have little free time but the acts themselves aren’t.

The most difficult part about them is doing it when you don’t want to, which is generally most of the time. Many of those things involve sacrificing one’s free time, which is easy enough to do on occasion, but not all the time.

I don’t think you’ll find that there are many people who do all, or even most, of those things (Catholics included). I do know several people who do, but the one thing they have in common is that they’re all Christian (and almost all Catholic). I have yet to meet a non-religious person, non-practising Christian, or someone from another religion who does even the majority of those things–though that’s not to say there aren’t any (and I can’t say I know a ton of atheists, agnostics, Muslims, etc. either).

I think even doing 2 or 3 good deeds a day is consistent enough to satisfy Yahweh. 2 or 3 isn’t hard at all.

Your ignorance of the Bible is very clear in this statement.

Care to elaborate?

It’s very clear in its condemnation of self-righteousness and relying on good works.

I never condemned self righteousness and doing good deeds; I have merely stated that being a decent person and doing good deeds is easy…that’s all lol

I meant that the Bible is opposed to relying on your ability to do good works.

Well that’s only when it comes to doing nothing but still having your prayer answered…Which is a completely specific circumstance.

I’m not sure what you’re referring to. I was saying that the Bible is clear that good works play no factor in what gets a man to heaven.

Lord Haseo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Lord Haseo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Living according to Catholic teachings is doing a heck of a lot. Take a look at Mother Theresa, for example. For most people, it just means trying to make the lives of everyone else around you better, in simple ways, but even then, it’s only nothing if you’re not really trying…

Other than not having sex before marriage and just being a decent person in general I don’t think living by those tenets is a particularly difficult challenge.

You’ve boiled Christianity down to just about nothing, and if you see it that way, it’s no wonder it seems easy. Even simple things, like being friendly with someone who’s a jerk to you, or performing random acts of kindness whenever the opportunity shows itself are easier said than done.

Volunteering in soup kitchens; protesting unjust laws; doing every chore, school assignment, and task at your job to the best of your ability; donating a sizeable amount of what you earn to charity; being cheerful even when your day has been crappy; cleaning the toilets so another family member doesn’t have to do it instead; sacrificing your time to help an acquaintance – or a stranger – with some difficulty; visiting people in the old folks home or the hospital just to cheer them up; taking the time to talk (cheerfully, sympathetically, and patiently) to that person who just won’t leave you alone and feels the desparate need to tell you their life story; or not getting angry at the guy who cuts you off in traffic are just a few of the things that every good Christian should do consistently, so far as they are able. Do I do them all? No. Most of them, yes, but it is very difficult to take time out of your schedule and visit strangers, or to not be irritable when you’re having a bad day, so as not to make it a bad day for other people.

Being kind to someone who wronged you is hard I admit but that depends on the person. Also “easier said than done” does not equate to “difficult”. It’s only difficult if you have little free time but the acts themselves aren’t.

The most difficult part about them is doing it when you don’t want to, which is generally most of the time. Many of those things involve sacrificing one’s free time, which is easy enough to do on occasion, but not all the time.

I don’t think you’ll find that there are many people who do all, or even most, of those things (Catholics included). I do know several people who do, but the one thing they have in common is that they’re all Christian (and almost all Catholic). I have yet to meet a non-religious person, non-practising Christian, or someone from another religion who does even the majority of those things–though that’s not to say there aren’t any (and I can’t say I know a ton of atheists, agnostics, Muslims, etc. either).

I think even doing 2 or 3 good deeds a day is consistent enough to satisfy Yahweh. 2 or 3 isn’t hard at all.

Your ignorance of the Bible is very clear in this statement.

Care to elaborate?

It’s very clear in its condemnation of self-righteousness and relying on good works.

I never condemned self righteousness and doing good deeds; I have merely stated that being a decent person and doing good deeds is easy…that’s all lol

I meant that the Bible is opposed to relying on your ability to do good works.

Lord Haseo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Living according to Catholic teachings is doing a heck of a lot. Take a look at Mother Theresa, for example. For most people, it just means trying to make the lives of everyone else around you better, in simple ways, but even then, it’s only nothing if you’re not really trying…

Other than not having sex before marriage and just being a decent person in general I don’t think living by those tenets is a particularly difficult challenge.

You’ve boiled Christianity down to just about nothing, and if you see it that way, it’s no wonder it seems easy. Even simple things, like being friendly with someone who’s a jerk to you, or performing random acts of kindness whenever the opportunity shows itself are easier said than done.

Volunteering in soup kitchens; protesting unjust laws; doing every chore, school assignment, and task at your job to the best of your ability; donating a sizeable amount of what you earn to charity; being cheerful even when your day has been crappy; cleaning the toilets so another family member doesn’t have to do it instead; sacrificing your time to help an acquaintance – or a stranger – with some difficulty; visiting people in the old folks home or the hospital just to cheer them up; taking the time to talk (cheerfully, sympathetically, and patiently) to that person who just won’t leave you alone and feels the desparate need to tell you their life story; or not getting angry at the guy who cuts you off in traffic are just a few of the things that every good Christian should do consistently, so far as they are able. Do I do them all? No. Most of them, yes, but it is very difficult to take time out of your schedule and visit strangers, or to not be irritable when you’re having a bad day, so as not to make it a bad day for other people.

Being kind to someone who wronged you is hard I admit but that depends on the person. Also “easier said than done” does not equate to “difficult”. It’s only difficult if you have little free time but the acts themselves aren’t.

The most difficult part about them is doing it when you don’t want to, which is generally most of the time. Many of those things involve sacrificing one’s free time, which is easy enough to do on occasion, but not all the time.

I don’t think you’ll find that there are many people who do all, or even most, of those things (Catholics included). I do know several people who do, but the one thing they have in common is that they’re all Christian (and almost all Catholic). I have yet to meet a non-religious person, non-practising Christian, or someone from another religion who does even the majority of those things–though that’s not to say there aren’t any (and I can’t say I know a ton of atheists, agnostics, Muslims, etc. either).

I think even doing 2 or 3 good deeds a day is consistent enough to satisfy Yahweh. 2 or 3 isn’t hard at all.

Your ignorance of the Bible is very clear in this statement.

Care to elaborate?

It’s very clear in its condemnation of self-righteousness and relying on good works.

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Lord Haseo said:

RicOlie_2 said:

Living according to Catholic teachings is doing a heck of a lot. Take a look at Mother Theresa, for example. For most people, it just means trying to make the lives of everyone else around you better, in simple ways, but even then, it’s only nothing if you’re not really trying…

Other than not having sex before marriage and just being a decent person in general I don’t think living by those tenets is a particularly difficult challenge.

You’ve boiled Christianity down to just about nothing, and if you see it that way, it’s no wonder it seems easy. Even simple things, like being friendly with someone who’s a jerk to you, or performing random acts of kindness whenever the opportunity shows itself are easier said than done.

Volunteering in soup kitchens; protesting unjust laws; doing every chore, school assignment, and task at your job to the best of your ability; donating a sizeable amount of what you earn to charity; being cheerful even when your day has been crappy; cleaning the toilets so another family member doesn’t have to do it instead; sacrificing your time to help an acquaintance – or a stranger – with some difficulty; visiting people in the old folks home or the hospital just to cheer them up; taking the time to talk (cheerfully, sympathetically, and patiently) to that person who just won’t leave you alone and feels the desparate need to tell you their life story; or not getting angry at the guy who cuts you off in traffic are just a few of the things that every good Christian should do consistently, so far as they are able. Do I do them all? No. Most of them, yes, but it is very difficult to take time out of your schedule and visit strangers, or to not be irritable when you’re having a bad day, so as not to make it a bad day for other people.

Being kind to someone who wronged you is hard I admit but that depends on the person. Also “easier said than done” does not equate to “difficult”. It’s only difficult if you have little free time but the acts themselves aren’t.

The most difficult part about them is doing it when you don’t want to, which is generally most of the time. Many of those things involve sacrificing one’s free time, which is easy enough to do on occasion, but not all the time.

I don’t think you’ll find that there are many people who do all, or even most, of those things (Catholics included). I do know several people who do, but the one thing they have in common is that they’re all Christian (and almost all Catholic). I have yet to meet a non-religious person, non-practising Christian, or someone from another religion who does even the majority of those things–though that’s not to say there aren’t any (and I can’t say I know a ton of atheists, agnostics, Muslims, etc. either).

I think even doing 2 or 3 good deeds a day is consistent enough to satisfy Yahweh. 2 or 3 isn’t hard at all.

Your ignorance of the Bible is very clear in this statement.

darthrush said:

moviefreakedmind said:

darthrush said:

darth_ender said:

darthrush said:

I have to make the decision to go on a Mormon mission or not at the end of high school. Not fun

Do it, darth. Is it hard? Of course. Was it worth it? More than you’ll ever know… Unless you go. I’m so grateful I did.

Sorry but I don’t believe in any of it at all. I find many of our beliefs sexist and inherently wrong. I have now become agnostic. The stress of the decision to go on a mission is entirely because of the emotional pain and humiliation I will go through my community and my family. My father has been a bishop and just got called as Stake President. It’s not the inner turmoil of whether it’s true, it’s the inner turmoil of what consequences I want. I’m extremely jealous of those born into good hearted agnostic homes with a supportive family who won’t force you to believe something that they think is crucial to if you can live with them forever again.

I’d urge you not to do it. Don’t sell out your principals.

That’s what keeps me leaning towards that decision. In the end I have to take a stand for what I believe and if that means them hating me and seeing me as a dissapointment then I’ll have to deal with that pain. Thanks for the kind words everyone

It definitely won’t be easy, but faking your way through a mission (which will probably be one of the most difficult experiences of your life) for approval is not easy either.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Let’s all agree never to bump another HansiG thread ever again, even by accident.

Agreed.

Femme Fatale - The Velvet Underground (& Nico)

Tyrphanax said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Tyrphanax said:

I’m solidly more Gen-X than Millennial according to the lists.

Well whattaya know – so am I!

Not that this surprises me at all, what with my loathing of everything 21st century.

There is plenty great about the 21st century, though.

I agree. I’m glad that I live today. All the conveniences of the 21st century as well as most of what was great about past decades readily available still.

ray_afraid said:

Double Trouble.

A Stevie Ray Vaughan film?