+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: Big JESUS event Next Sunday!

  1. Default

    Why a movie? Isn't Palm Sunday enough?

  2. #32
    Location: Southeast USA
    Posts: 62,129
    My Latest Mood: Amused

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by septimine View Post
    Why a movie? Isn't Palm Sunday enough?
    Its a well done movie.. Been out since 2000.

    Watch if you can.. It may also be on the internet.

    Last night I watche Peter and Paul.. part one and two.

    It was good.

  3. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leffe View Post
    This film would seem to be a part of the modern day marketing.
    I haven't seen the movie but that could very well be correct. We have numerous movies that have been used to market religion. The Ten Commandments and Ben Hur both promoted Chirstianity through fictional stories and Exodus marketed Jewish Zionism through a fictional story.
    Republicans were more likely than Democrats to express racial prejudice in the questions measuring explicit (anti-black) racism (79% among Republicans compared with 32% among Democrats).
    Source: 2012 AP Study on racial prejudice in America (link providee on request by PM)

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva_TD View Post
    I haven't seen the movie but that could very well be correct. We have numerous movies that have been used to market religion. The Ten Commandments and Ben Hur both promoted Chirstianity through fictional stories and Exodus marketed Jewish Zionism through a fictional story.

    As modern day 'evangelism' could be considered by the secular as 'marketing,' it is merely a following of the Great Command of over a thousand years ago (when there was no TV, movies, etc.) of "Go ye therefore into all the world and preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ."

    However, I can see how those with the hostile, secular, atheistic minds would consider this obedience to that command as being merely 'marketing," as not having any knowledge of spiritual things and being just natural-minded men.....

  5. #35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OverDrive View Post
    As modern day 'evangelism' could be considered by the secular as 'marketing,' it is merely a following of the Great Command of over a thousand years ago (when there was no TV, movies, etc.) of "Go ye therefore into all the world and preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ."

    However, I can see how those with the hostile, secular, atheistic minds would consider this obedience to that command as being merely 'marketing," as not having any knowledge of spiritual things and being just natural-minded men.....
    Sadly to many Christians condemn anyone that would question their religion by calling them "hostile, secular, atheists" when that really isn't the case at all. I was raised a Christian by a very loving mother that I respect tremendously and I certainly have no hostility towards Christians per se.

    There are certainly reasons why I rejected Christianity when I became old enough to think for myself and I learned that all religions are inventions of man but that doesn't imply I have any hostility against Christians. My only objections against those Christians that attempt to force their religious beliefs on me through the laws of our land. Enough on that issue.

    Somewhat ironic that Mark 16:15 was mentioned as that appears to be one of the "marketing" examples from the New Testament. While Jesus never sought out anyone but Jews while alive in the Gospel of Mark somehow "magically" Jesus changed his tune after death and ordered his disciples to go out into the world to preach and convert non-Jews to Christianity. The Gospel of Mark wasn't written until somewhere between 37 AD and 75 AD appaers to be including Mark 16:15 as a part of the marketing plan to include non-Jews into the new Christian religion.

    I would believe that people would logically question the creditability of statements attributed to a religious leader that doesn't propose something until after they die. Why didn't Jesus propose this in any of his sermons while alive but only addressed it after death? That seems a bit illogical IMO. Based upon actually reading the New Testament we really should question any statements attributed to Jesus after death. Did they really occur at all or where these created by the imaginations of the authors of the New Testament. That is, of course, a question that everyone needs to answer for themself and I don't try to influence anyone one way or the other.
    Republicans were more likely than Democrats to express racial prejudice in the questions measuring explicit (anti-black) racism (79% among Republicans compared with 32% among Democrats).
    Source: 2012 AP Study on racial prejudice in America (link providee on request by PM)

  6. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva_TD View Post
    Sadly to many Christians condemn anyone that would question their religion by calling them "hostile, secular, atheists" when that really isn't the case at all. I was raised a Christian by a very loving mother that I respect tremendously and I certainly have no hostility towards Christians per se.

    There are certainly reasons why I rejected Christianity when I became old enough to think for myself and I learned that all religions are inventions of man but that doesn't imply I have any hostility against Christians.

    I disagree with this statement, as seeming to be noble in presenting your case but being hostile (daily) to those who believe in the msg of Christ, and so do also promote such msg....

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva_TD View Post
    My only objections against those Christians that attempt to force their religious beliefs on me through the laws of our land. Enough on that issue.

    Somewhat ironic that Mark 16:15 was mentioned as that appears to be one of the "marketing" examples from the New Testament. While Jesus never sought out anyone but Jews while alive in the Gospel of Mark somehow "magically" Jesus changed his tune after death and ordered his disciples to go out into the world to preach and convert non-Jews to Christianity. The Gospel of Mark wasn't written until somewhere between 37 AD and 75 AD appaers to be including Mark 16:15 as a part of the marketing plan to include non-Jews into the new Christian religion.

    I would believe that people would logically question the creditability of statements attributed to a religious leader that doesn't propose something until after they die. Why didn't Jesus propose this in any of his sermons while alive but only addressed it after death? That seems a bit illogical IMO. Based upon actually reading the New Testament we really should question any statements attributed to Jesus after death. Did they really occur at all or where these created by the imaginations of the authors of the New Testament. That is, of course, a question that everyone needs to answer for themself and I don't try to influence anyone one way or the other.

    Jesus came to those who were called 'the chosen' by the promise of God the Father 1000's of years B4 to Abraham and his descendents.

    John 1:11-12

    11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God,

    Galatians 3:14

    "Through Christ Jesus, God has blessed the Gentiles with the same blessing he promised to Abraham, so that we who are believers might receive the promised Holy Spirit through faith."

    Jesus thru a revelation to Peter, following his resurrection and ascension to heaven , showed him the table set with 'unclean' foods, and said eat, and Peter also knew that He meant that Gentiles were not to be considered also as unclean; and Peter went to and had Gentiles come to him right after, who received the Gospel and the Holy Spirit with the 'evidence!'

    Bottom line is:

    An analogy is : as a sighted person having to explain 'color' to one blind since birth, I hate to have to tell you this, but...

    "Denial of the truth does not make it of no effect." And so, words of denial, altho they be many, do nothing but sound as but 'vanity in the wind' to those who are of the truth. To those who have nothing but a natural mind, w/o spiritual revelation and therefore do not appraise the things of the spiritual realm, they must continue to exist in their rebellion with "one less dimension' of sight within their mortal lives..

    Romans 8:7

    "Because the carnal mind (being set on the flesh) is enmity against (as hostile to) God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be."(as being set on the flesh and not the spirit.)
    Last edited by OverDrive; Mar 26 2012 at 11:16 AM.

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leffe View Post
    The vatican won't complain about it, hollywood will do a great job for church membership.
    I'm not really looking to the Vatican for leadership.....I don't even regard them as any authority on Christianity anyway. With the exception for a few, such as people like mother Theresa, most of the others are fake Christians.

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. To me Gadaffi was Jesus, died like Jesus. anyone noticed?
    By peoplevsmedia in forum Political Opinions & Beliefs
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: Oct 23 2012, 10:22 AM
  2. Tea Party Jesus vs Christian Jesus
    By Serlak2007 in forum Political Opinions & Beliefs
    Replies: 138
    Last Post: Jan 28 2012, 01:53 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks