T1B

As if they weren't already pissed about The Da Vinci Code movie, now British actor Ian McKellen sez:

"Well, I've often thought the Bible should have a disclaimer in the front saying this is fiction. I mean, walking on water..."

Well he is right. He is also gay so thumpers don't put any stock into what he says!! RACK MAGNETO/GANDALF!!!

Trollfessor wrote:As if they weren't already pissed about The Da Vinci Code movie, now British actor Ian McKellen sez:

"Well, I've often thought the Bible should have a disclaimer in the front saying this is fiction. I mean, walking on water..."

Haha. He has a point.

Sudden Sam wrote:I must be extremely dense.

Would someone please explain to me why Christians are so upset over a novel?!?! Do they not understand what a novel is?

WTF?!?!

Christian, Non or whatever....

Plenty of hyperactive stupid people everywhere to worry about plenty of meaningless shit. Just another day in Paradise.

Stop making me agree with you, you bastard.

A Christian, by definition, is a credulous moron who will swallow a ridiculous pack of lies without question.

Not too far off from mine:

Christianity is something that folks rally around quite easily. They can behave in whatever manner they choose, as long as they talk the talk. Christianity really is about what is convenient or pleasing to the Christian - as long as his credit holds up.

Christianity didn't spread across the globe because it restricted behavior. Its appeal resided in the fact that it slid over a prior belief system or mythology without disturbing the foundation.

One doesn't have to espouse a system of beliefs as a Christian. One may simply pick and choose what they find to be convenient and pleasing to them.

As much as the historical Christ might have gritted his teeth, the money-changers ended Christianity within his living memory. What goes for Christianity today is merely what you make up and hold over the heads of other folks.

Sam,

Not wanting to spread a blanket over all of Christianity--and I'm not--however, in the course of getting to know some of the Christian friends or co-workers I've met over the years, one thing seems to run as a constant.
If any aspect of the Bible is shown or proven to be in error, it brings down the rest of the Bible like a house of cards. This is from the mouth of Christians, not me. So, supposing that somehow the elements from the "DaVinci Code" hold some sort of hidden truth (bear in mind, this all kind of got kick started by "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" and that ilk), the book then would serve as a threat to the basic tenets of fundamental Christian belief. Even though the whole damn thing is complete fiction.

The only ones who are over-reacting are the fanatics anyway. And if the stuff a simple (albeit extremely popular) novel is enough to chaffe their overly sensitive hides, so be it. Pretty sad state of affairs when your own system of belief can be rocked so easily by a work of pulp fiction.


And I will strike down upon thee with great
vengeance and furious anger those
who attempt to poison and destroy
my brothers. And you will know my
name is the Lord when I lay my
vengeance upon you.

Like I said, fanatics.

mvscal wrote:
The Da Vinci Code like most of my thought processes are primarily a work of fiction with some historical characters.

fixed it for you ya douchebag

ok there, UBBrainiac.

I dont know what you are talking about
:wink:

quacker backer wrote:I dont know what you are talking about
:wink:

Spoken like a devout Christian.

I ain't going to get too excited until an Osama Bin Pope rises up and starts whacking people and blowing shit up over a cartoon of Jesus.

It could be worse. Just sayin'

PSUFAN wrote:

quacker backer wrote:I dont know what you are talking about
:wink:

Spoken like a devout Christian.

I am just saying you should post the whole quote

"Well, I've often thought the Bible should have a disclaimer in the front saying this is fiction. I mean, walking on water, it takes an act of faith. And I have faith in this movie. Not that it's true, not that it's factual, but that it's a jolly good story. And I think audiences are clever enough and bright enough to separate out fact and fiction, and discuss the thing after they've seen it."

and yes i am also saying mvscal is a moron

PSUFAN wrote: Christianity is something that folks rally around quite easily. They can behave in whatever manner they choose, as long as they talk the talk. Christianity really is about what is convenient or pleasing to the Christian - as long as his credit holds up.

You've just described about every belief system in the world. Swap "christian" with muslim, buddhist, republican, democrat, whatever.

Christianity didn't spread across the globe because it restricted behavior. Its appeal resided in the fact that it slid over a prior belief system or mythology without disturbing the foundation.

All more powerful ideologies and faiths retain some aspects of what they replace. The christianity that came out of Christ's mouth was a lot different than what's offered today and I'm sure today's communism would have Lenin quirking an eyebrow.

One doesn't have to espouse a system of beliefs as a Christian. One may simply pick and choose what they find to be convenient and pleasing to them.

To some, yes. To other's, no.

As much as the historical Christ might have gritted his teeth, the money-changers ended Christianity within his living memory. What goes for Christianity today is merely what you make up and hold over the heads of other folks.

True to a large degree, but many still strive for the heart of it which is nothing but good. Given the rabid idealists wreaking havoc in the world today, I'd say Christians protesting a silly novel is a relative yawner.

Dumbest thread I've read in a month of sundays. Kinda surprising considering the inhabitants...

Man was created in God's image, to be happy.
Why is man not happy...?
He is separated from God. (Gen 3:6)
He comes under influence from satan.
He develops 'spiritual problems' and can not find rest or peace.
Mental problems come.
Then physical problems.
Then he dies and goes to hell.
His spiritual problems are passed down to his next generation.

God gave the Christ so that man could get out from this problem.


That is Christianity.


Psst.....

Don't look at the Christians.
They are fallible humans, ........ like you.

Look at the Christ.

That's the ticket.

Rack Spinach Genie for stepping to the plate.

Unrack rozy for forgetting his vagisil.

Christianity didn't spread across the globe because it restricted behavior. Its appeal resided in the fact that it slid over a prior belief system or mythology without disturbing the foundation.

^ worth reading again. You see, Islam spread by the Sword. Christianity did a bit of that, but mostly it was promulgated by preachers who reassured the converts that they'd not have to change a thing about what was important to them. They merely had to call things by a few different names, grease the palms of the right clergy, and not ask too many questions.

Catholicism, in particular, begs for Tradition to be Observed...but tradition can be quite superficial. One goes through the motions - as long as they don't prove to be too onerous - and gets right back to doing what one wishes, needing only the nod of a priest from behind a screen and a few rosary grapplings for absolution. Shit, peel off a few benjies, and that's even better. My Son, you are Forgiven.

mvscal wrote:A Christian, by definition, is a credulous moron who will swallow a ridiculous pack of lies without question.

So in a nutshell, mvscal, what you're saying is that Origen, Augustine, Aquinas, Eckhart, Luther, Erasmus, and Schleiermacher were all basically full of shit.

[deadpan]Clearly, such insight places us mere mortals in the presence of greatness.[/deadpan]

Whatever, dude.

x ∞

Truman wrote:So in a nutshell, mvscal, what you're saying is that Origen, Augustine, Aquinas, Eckhart, Luther, Erasmus, and Schleiermacher were all basically full of shit.

From that list, I'd say that Luther is the only one that is occassionally full of shit.

Truman wrote:

mvscal wrote:A Christian, by definition, is a credulous moron who will swallow a ridiculous pack of lies without question.

So in a nutshell, mvscal, what you're saying is that Origen, Augustine, Aquinas, Eckhart, Luther, Erasmus, and Schleiermacher were all basically full of shit.

[deadpan]Clearly, such insight places us mere mortals in the presence of greatness.[/deadpan]

Whatever, dude.

x ∞

mv was jumping back and forth between the "Let's shoot all illegal immigrants" thread and the "Let's feed all the Christians to the Lions" thread and lost his bearings.

You'll have to forgive him. He knows not of what he speaks.

Husker4ever wrote:I ain't going to get too excited until an Osama Bin Pope rises up and starts whacking people and blowing shit up over a cartoon of Jesus.

It could be worse. Just sayin'

Yeah. Spanish Inquistion, the Holy Wars, ect. ect.

Truth is if you flipped the script and the majority of muslims were in America and the majority of christians were in the Middle East. We would be going through the same bullshit we are now.

Mr T wrote: Truth is if you flipped the script and the majority of muslims were in America and the majority of christians were in the Middle East. We would be going through the same bullshit we are now.

Muslims in both civilized countries and third world rioted and flipped out over those cartoons. Christianity has had its ugly spots, centuries ago...but the two aren't comparable in any way today, regardless of locale.

PSUFAN wrote:

Unrack rozy for forgetting his vagisil.

So you're saying I shouldn't have been surprised?

Forgive me for the moment of honesty. I'll dumb back down to your level if it makes you feel more complete.

RACK 'tart

So you're saying I shouldn't have been surprised?

I'm saying that your monosyllabic response to this thread was a bit pathetic.

Actually, it was right on the mark, bigot.

No rozy, PSUFAN is right. Your response was weak, critical without adding anything to the conversation. And then you throw out a "bigot" blast that comes as a complete non-sequitor.

Your next intelligent thought will be your first.

Now then, care to enlighten us with your repartee?

rozy wrote:Actually, it was right on the mark, bigot.

Sure, if you say so...just know that your voice is getting a little thin and reedy.

I'm interested in what led you to this observation:

"Dumbest thread I've read in a month of sundays. Kinda surprising considering the inhabitants..."

Also, what causes you to brand me a bigot?

Let's see if you can prove Jay wrong:

"Your next intelligent thought will be your first.

Now then, care to enlighten us with your repartee?"

Or, just slide off, this time with a little blood stripe in your slime trail.

Maybe rozy is a '51' ... ?

:wink:

Jay in Phoenix wrote:Sam,

Not wanting to spread a blanket over all of Christianity--and I'm not--however, in the course of getting to know some of the Christian friends or co-workers I've met over the years, one thing seems to run as a constant.
If any aspect of the Bible is shown or proven to be in error, it brings down the rest of the Bible like a house of cards. This is from the mouth of Christians, not me.

You paint with too broad a brush, imho.

There are many different sects of Christianity, and they hold many different beliefs with respect to a literal reading of the Bible. Growing up Catholic, and attending Catholic school for so many years, I was always taught that the Bible need not, and indeed should not, be read literally.

With respect to the movie, it doesn't bother me. However, I understand that the Catholic Church is threatening to excommunicate anyone who sees it. I take that threat seriously enough -- perhaps moreso for my mother's sake than my own -- not to see the movie in light of that. But I won't protest it, either.

Terry, I appreciate the response, however...

You paint with too broad a brush, imho.

It wasn't my brush bro. Those words, the sentiment about the Bible and the house of cards, was exactly what some fundamentalist Christians I know have said repeatedly. Their rules, not mine.

There are many different sects of Christianity, and they hold many different beliefs with respect to a literal reading of the Bible. Growing up Catholic, and attending Catholic school for so many years, I was always taught that the Bible need not, and indeed should not, be read literally.

My sentiments exactly. I've always viewed the Bible as a reference tool, a set of guidelines built around a series of parables and stories. Some based in truth, others about as ridiculous and far-fetched to the point of the absurd. Not one of us can say with any degree of certainty how much truth there is in the Bible, nor how much fiction. The Book is really all about the Message. It's historical accuracy, let's just say, is rather loose.

With respect to the movie, it doesn't bother me. However, I understand that the Catholic Church is threatening to excommunicate anyone who sees it. I take that threat seriously enough -- perhaps moreso for my mother's sake than my own -- not to see the movie in light of that. But I won't protest it, either.

And therein lies the biggest problem. You're saying you are going to let your church dictate what you see. That's censorship bro. Very bad thing.

If the Diocese wants to run around with a blanket over its' head playing Chicken Little because of a fictional piece of trivia like the DaVinci Code, your Church is in a sorry state of affairs indeed. Don't go see the movie because it sucks, not because a bunch of old men cowardly say so.

And what the hell, what if the movie is good?

Think about that.

Jay in Phoenix wrote:Terry, I appreciate the response, however...

You paint with too broad a brush, imho.

It wasn't my brush bro. Those words, the sentiment about the Bible and the house of cards, was exactly what some fundamentalist Christians I know have said repeatedly. Their rules, not mine.

Oh, I don't doubt that. But not all Christians are fundamentalists. In fact, if anything, fundamentalists are a minority among Christians. A very vocal minority, granted, but a minority nonetheless.

With respect to the movie, it doesn't bother me. However, I understand that the Catholic Church is threatening to excommunicate anyone who sees it. I take that threat seriously enough -- perhaps moreso for my mother's sake than my own -- not to see the movie in light of that. But I won't protest it, either.

And therein lies the biggest problem. You're saying you are going to let your church dictate what you see. That's censorship bro. Very bad thing.

If the Diocese wants to run around with a blanket over its' head playing Chicken Little because of a fictional piece of trivia like the DaVinci Code, your Church is in a sorry state of affairs indeed. Don't go see the movie because it sucks, not because a bunch of old men cowardly say so.

And what the hell, what if the movie is good?

Think about that.

Like I said, perhaps it's moreso for the benefit of my mother than anyone else. She's one of those old-school Catholics who thinks that everyone is either a Catholic or a heathen, and if one of her kids were to be excommunicated, that might very well kill her.

As for the movie, the truth is twofold. First, I don't have enough interest in the movie to spend the time or money to see it. I'm usually in the school of thought that says that when you have a movie about a book, the book is always superior to see the movie. And I haven't even bothered to read the book yet, and doubt I will.

Second, in all honesty, these days the only movies I ever wind up seeing are movies that interest my kids. Along that line, X-Men III, or whatever it's called, is about the only thing in the pipeline right now.

perhaps moreso for my mother's sake than my own

The saying goes, "time to put aside childish things". Respectfully, I ask...should you fear excommunication for your own sake, or for the sake of your mother? At what point can you make the decision in your own terms?

Any Catholic ban on this - or any other movie - roots in ignorance. The concept that viewing a movie is tantamount to espousing what is portrayed in it is...childish, and that's being charitable.

If you are an adult Catholic, or Christian, you should be able to draw your own conclusions about what you witness. I understand that adhering to such a religion might contradict that statement, but it's true in a lot of ways.

mvscal is correct that Catholics are dupes - in that they are willing to go against their own judgements in order to satisfy the whims of their leaders - even where they know the judgements of their leaders to be unfair or inadequate.

I can't imagine Terry espousing some of the views that shame the Catholic Church. I can't imagine the same of my parents. The truth is, they don't. Nonetheless, they bend a willing ear to the caprices of a corrupt, craven, criminal, and ignorance-celebrating Church.

What gives?

God gave the Christ so that man could get out from this problem.

I'd settle for a good recliner, some help with my bills, and another Super Bowl for Favre to retire with.

Oh, and world peace.

Amen.

Uncle Fester wrote:

God gave the Christ so that man could get out from this problem.

I'd settle for a good recliner, some help with my bills, and another Super Bowl for Favre to retire with.

Oh, and world peace.

Amen.

might be easier to walk on water

PSUFAN wrote: The saying goes, "time to put aside childish things". Respectfully, I ask...should you fear excommunication for your own sake, or for the sake of your mother? At what point can you make the decision in your own terms?

So why don't you ? And leave the spirtual and theological counseling to someone more qualified than you.

You think you can.

1. Run a war better.
2. Run a DoD better.
3. Run a Religious Institution Better
4. Run a Universe better.

So why don't you make the decision to lead the way and lead us "dupes" into the light. Careful, you might have to leave your chair.

might be easier to walk on water

Not so hard.

Good ski boat and about 41 mph will do it.

mvscal wrote:

Truman wrote:

mvscal wrote:A Christian, by definition, is a credulous moron who will swallow a ridiculous pack of lies without question.

So in a nutshell, mvscal, what you're saying is that Origen, Augustine, Aquinas, Eckhart, Luther, Erasmus, and Schleiermacher were all basically full of shit.

Not basically. Completely.

It's a fucking fairy tale, dumbshit. People don't walk on water. They don't change it into wine. They don't magically create bread out of thin air and they damn sure don't rise from the dead.

You idiots have been had.

]
mvscal is not in line for the kool-aid.........

m.allen at the lemonade stand

Uncle Fester wrote:

might be easier to walk on water

Not so hard.

Good ski boat and about 41 mph will do it.

that sounds awesome today

meet you out at the lake

I got the beer
(for you it will be Hamms)

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Growing up Catholic, and attending Catholic school for so many years, I was always taught that the Bible need not, and indeed should not, be read literally.

umm, Terry? I don't know which Catholic church or school you went to be indoctrinated in catechism, but the one I went to shoved that literal interpretation of the Bible shit pretty much right down your throat, and you best best like it, mr.

Thus my rebellion when I grew old enough to make my own decisions. Any yeah, my mother is one of them old school Catholics also, and she's none too happy about her kids who don't go to church anymore.

I understand that the Catholic Church is threatening to excommunicate anyone who sees it.

Link? I find that hard to believe. As anal as the RCC is, I don't think they want go there.

ps; Rack Hillbilly... err, Tom in VA.

Excellent.