| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
| Date: |
19 May 2006 09:14:46 AM |
| Object: |
Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
The Da Vinci Code is one of the greatest chances for people to learn
the truth, in spite of it's fiction...or, more specifically, BECAUSE of
it's fiction. The author says it is fiction. The film makers say it
is fiction. In fact, Sony (the film's makers) put up a website where
Christian ministers could tell the truth behind the story.
People will go see the film. They will be filled with questions
like...is that really true...did that really happen...etc. Where will
they go for the truth. Right now there are over 40 books on the market
with the truth. These books like Cracking Da Vinci's Code are written
by those with advanced degrees (this book specifically has authors with
advanced degrees from Princeton, Drew, and Harvard.) You find in
these books what you won't find in Brown's book or the movie,
verifiable footnotes and sources to check.
Personally, I think Sony is making this film just to destroy it. They
picked a maker of Christian favored films to make it (Ron Howard), a
man that played a false minister to be the lead (Tom Hanks..false
minister in The Ladykillers), according to recent reports edited out
the most controversial statements from the book, and set up a website
(as mentioned before) of ministers to tell the truth. This very well
could be a Christian attempt to downplay and yet profit from the story,
but I think you should go see it anyway...then, read the truth.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
| User: "Zadok" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 11:16:32 AM |
|
|
"Wide Eyed in Blunder" <> wrote in message ...
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
Kenny nobody gives a ***** what you say.
But I will go see it!!
And when I want truth, I'll go to the Gospel of Philip, that tells me that
Jesus was married!!
Then I'll ask you for any early text of the church, be it bible or church
father, that says he was not married.
Then I'll listen to your silence!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "ewdotson" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 03:32:07 PM |
|
|
Zadok wrote:
"Wide Eyed in Blunder" <> wrote in message ...
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
Kenny nobody gives a ***** what you say.
But I will go see it!!
And when I want truth, I'll go to the Gospel of Philip, that tells me that
Jesus was married!!
Then I'll ask you for any early text of the church, be it bible or church
father, that says he was not married.
Then I'll listen to your silence!!
The Gospel of Philip says absolutely no such thing.
--
Ernest
.
|
|
|
| User: "Zadok" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 04:35:18 PM |
|
|
"ewdotson" <> wrote in message
The Gospel of Philip says absolutely no such thing.
--
Ernest
Gospel of Philip - Patterson Brown translation!!
36. There were three Mariams who walked with the Lord at all times: his
mother and [his] sister and (the) Magdalene- this one who is called his
consort. Thus his (true) Mother and Sister and Mate is (also called)
'Mariam'.
The Magdalene, called his consort and his MATE.
And you were saying??
What does Isenburg say. He uses Companion in both places.
What does Ehrman say. He uses Lover in both places.
What does your translation say??
Give us a fucking break will you!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "ewdotson" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
20 May 2006 08:50:13 AM |
|
|
Zadok wrote:
"ewdotson" <> wrote in message
The Gospel of Philip says absolutely no such thing.
--
Ernest
Gospel of Philip - Patterson Brown translation!!
36. There were three Mariams who walked with the Lord at all times: his
mother and [his] sister and (the) Magdalene- this one who is called his
consort. Thus his (true) Mother and Sister and Mate is (also called)
'Mariam'.
The Magdalene, called his consort and his MATE.
And you were saying??
What does Isenburg say. He uses Companion in both places.
What does Ehrman say. He uses Lover in both places.
What does your translation say??
Give us a fucking break will you!!
The Brown and Ehrman translations are questionable at best. The word
is, in fact, companion. Now, if the gospel had been written in
Aramaic, the word would in fact imply "mate" or "lover". But the
gospel was written in Coptic. The word used in the original text is
'koinonos', which is borrowed from the Greek and is neither a technical
term nor a synonym for 'wife' or 'spouse.' It's much more
likely that koinonos here means 'sister' in the spiritual sense, as
this is how it is used elsewhere in this sort of literature. Sorry.
--
Ernest
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 12:42:28 PM |
|
|
Zadok wrote:
"Wide Eyed in Blunder" <> wrote in message ...
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
Kenny nobody gives a ***** what you say.
Do you think that matters to me? However, the constant attacks on me
only verify my threats ot your worldview. Isn't that the view of the
Da Vinci makers...controversy causes attention? Your attacks on me
bring me attention and give foundation to my statements. If no one
really cared (or protested my statements), I'd be like Buckeye that
everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
But I will go see it!!
And when I want truth, I'll go to the Gospel of Philip, that tells me that
Jesus was married!!
So...a later historical document than the other gospels, one never
quoted or used by Jesus apostles in their writing, one rejected by the
early church, and one with literary and factual contradictons within
itself. See my other post about how gullible atheists are.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Zadok" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 12:57:19 PM |
|
|
"Wide Eyed in Blunder" <> wrote in message
Do you think that matters to me? However, the constant attacks on me
only verify my threats ot your worldview. Isn't that the view of the
Da Vinci makers...controversy causes attention? Your attacks on me
bring me attention and give foundation to my statements. If no one
really cared (or protested my statements), I'd be like Buckeye that
everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
No, I don't think it matters to you. Your only purpose is to SPAM your
website and try and sell your books.
To do that, you don't care in the least how idiotic you look!!
And when I want truth, I'll go to the Gospel of Philip, that tells me
that
Jesus was married!!
So...a later historical document than the other gospels, one never
quoted or used by Jesus apostles in their writing, one rejected by the
early church, and one with literary and factual contradictons within
itself. See my other post about how gullible atheists are.
Prehaps you can quote one historical document that Jesus' apostles used??
Prehaps you can show us what early church rejected it?? Prehaps you can give
us a source saying that the early church (say before 325AD) rejected it??
Can you do that??
Prehaps you can show us definite dates for the Gospel of Philip, say
compared to definite dates for John's gospel??
Prehaps you only posted the above to avoid showing us anything from the
bible, or an early church father, that shows us that Jesus was NOT married!!
Do you have an answer to any of the above??
I'll lay you odds, that you will avoid answering any of it!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 01:31:42 PM |
|
|
In article <3Gnbg.24975$Fl1.19033@edtnps89> "Zadok" <nobler@accesswave.ca> writes:
"Wide Eyed in Blunder" <> wrote in message
Do you think that matters to me? However, the constant attacks on me
only verify my threats ot your worldview. Isn't that the view of the
Da Vinci makers...controversy causes attention? Your attacks on me
bring me attention and give foundation to my statements. If no one
really cared (or protested my statements), I'd be like Buckeye that
everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
No, I don't think it matters to you. Your only purpose is to SPAM your
website and try and sell your books.
To do that, you don't care in the least how idiotic you look!!
And when I want truth, I'll go to the Gospel of Philip, that tells me
that
Jesus was married!!
So...a later historical document than the other gospels, one never
quoted or used by Jesus apostles in their writing, one rejected by the
early church, and one with literary and factual contradictons within
itself. See my other post about how gullible atheists are.
But if you do, don't waste your time pointing out that his post,
taken at face value, actually proves something quite different.
Or do, if it's fun. Just don't expect him to defend it in turn.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
20 May 2006 02:31:05 PM |
|
|
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
:|. . . I'd be like Buckeye that
:|everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
Gee guy, you can't even get that right either.
I do love to run across things like that so I can make you look foolish
it is so easy to do.
Let's see
I have a website that a good portion of the items on it were put
together, written, edited of otherwise collected by me.
As of today that sitre since July 1998 has received 1,121,837 visits and
2,326,326 page views.
Apparently I am not being ignored that much.
That web site has been cited in a at least one book and one article that I
am aware of. Going to be cited in at least one other book being written
now
See below:
#1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you approve my request to use some quotes from ”The Constitutional
Principle: Separation of Church and State?” I emailed you earlier. My
first book is in publication. It is entitled From Schoolhouse to
Courthouse: Exposing America’s New Terror From Within. Thanks!
The person who is writing the book is High school teacher at a Christian
High School in Georgia. He teaches American History and Geography
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the information. I teach writing and research at _____ State
University and have used information from a great many different sites on
the Internet. I always try to check the credentials of the individuals who
are responsible for any information on the sites I visit since I use the
information for class discussions on logic and drawing conclusions from
whatever information or statistics or authorities are supplied.
One of our discussions centers on church-state issues. The question of
Christianity and its relation to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution
naturally arise. The conception of “god” that is related to the historical
period (obviously, the question of deistic conceptions versus Christian
conceptions) and to present issues of church-state (which most often
ignore the historical and political precedents and seek to Christianize the
document) obviously are ones that naturally need to be considered in any
discussion. The site (http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html) for
which Jim Alison supplies many answers to such questions did not list
additional information on the researcher, and so my question as to
credentials.
Thanks for supplying additional information and for informing the public of
the necessity for maintaining the separation of church and state.
A_____ ________
Associate Professor
_______ Department
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Susan Batte and myself were both quoted in at least one book
A sitting Judge on the Federal Courts of Appeals for the 10th Circuit
wrote and asked for data about us and our work so at the very least he is
acquainted with that web site.
I am one of Mike Newdow's researchers
I get email that says you are wrong. Email that says all sorts of people
read that web site and I get email from time to time from people
commenting on my posts.
My posts in 1995 led to a email invitation from a Associate professor at U
of Louisville asking me to help him create a website on church state
separation Thus in Jan 1996 The Separation of Church and State Home Page
came into being and ran from Jan 1996 to Nov 1997 though it remained on
line until June 1999 http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnpintro.htm
and received almost 100,000 hits
I have posted a thousands of posts since Feb 1995 when I posted my very
first post in UseNet Newgroups and I would say that thousands of them have
been read and there are still posts of mine being read now.
I have separation of church and state Yahoo group which I spend time at
and post some on the Secular Web as well. So I don't do a whole lot here
anymore beyond posting the daily church state news thingies and if you
notice I don't pay much attention to them once I post them. Often times
don't even read replies to then when there are replies
Mainly I stopped taking a more active rile in the newsgroups because I was
bored. People who actually were able to generate decent discussions in the
areas i am interested in left and all that remains are trolls like u fred
dana strickland and the like
No challenge there, rather boring.
But, I am still active and still doing things. Even the daily news thingies
I post get reactions from people at times and though they are not my
posts, I didn't write them, they are being read by people.
So once more you have been shown to be full of it
Have a nice day
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the US and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
22 May 2006 08:43:36 AM |
|
|
wrote:
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
:|. . . I'd be like Buckeye that
:|everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
Gee guy, you can't even get that right either.
I do love to run across things like that so I can make you look foolish
it is so easy to do.
Let's see
I have a website that a good portion of the items on it were put
together, written, edited of otherwise collected by me.
As of today that sitre since July 1998 has received 1,121,837 visits and
2,326,326 page views.
Apparently I am not being ignored that much.
I hope every webmaster noted that Buckeye just admitted to using his
posts to spam a website (intentionally), and is using hits on that
website to show the effectiveness of his posts. Thus, his links are
not meant to be a signature (like mine) to tell who he is but his posts
are intentional ads.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
23 May 2006 05:04:57 AM |
|
|
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
:|
:|I hope every webmaster noted that Buckeye just admitted to using his
:|posts to spam a website (intentionally), and is using hits on that
:|website to show the effectiveness of his posts. Thus, his links are
:|not meant to be a signature (like mine) to tell who he is but his posts
:|are intentional ads.
:|
:|Ken Clifton
:|http://www.lulu.com/writingken
Bawl, whine, sob, boo hoo, poor baby
I do bother you so much
Now dufus, let's get back to the issue which you tend to like to cover up
when it exposed one of your usual incorrect and unsubstantiated claims
Poor kanndoo or kantdo or better yet kandufus , what a sorry sack you are.
I have bothered you so much that you tried to silence me by complaining to
my ISP.
You bawled like a baby with frustration because my ISP ignored you. You
just couldn't comprehend they viewed you as a crack pot worthy of being
ignored.
The original point here was another one of your usual unsubstantiated
claims:
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
:|. . . I'd be like Buckeye that
:|everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
Gee guy, you can't even get that right either.
I do love to run across things like that so I can make you look foolish
it is so easy to do.
Let's see
I have a website that a good portion of the items on it were put
together, written, edited of otherwise collected by me.
As of today that site since July 1998 has received 1,121,837 visits and
2,326,326 page views.
Apparently I am not being ignored that much.
That web site has been cited in a at least one book and one article that I
am aware of. Going to be cited in at least one other book being written
now
See below:
#1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did you approve my request to use some quotes from ”The Constitutional
Principle: Separation of Church and State?” I emailed you earlier. My
first book is in publication. It is entitled From Schoolhouse to
Courthouse: Exposing America’s New Terror From Within. Thanks!
The person who is writing the book is High school teacher at a Christian
High School in Georgia. He teaches American History and Geography
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the information. I teach writing and research at _____ State
University and have used information from a great many different sites on
the Internet. I always try to check the credentials of the individuals who
are responsible for any information on the sites I visit since I use the
information for class discussions on logic and drawing conclusions from
whatever information or statistics or authorities are supplied.
One of our discussions centers on church-state issues. The question of
Christianity and its relation to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution
naturally arise. The conception of “god” that is related to the historical
period (obviously, the question of deistic conceptions versus Christian
conceptions) and to present issues of church-state (which most often
ignore the historical and political precedents and seek to Christianize the
document) obviously are ones that naturally need to be considered in any
discussion. The site (http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html) for
which Jim Alison supplies many answers to such questions did not list
additional information on the researcher, and so my question as to
credentials.
Thanks for supplying additional information and for informing the public of
the necessity for maintaining the separation of church and state.
A_____ ________
Associate Professor
_______ Department
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Susan Batte and myself were both quoted in at least one book
A sitting Judge on the Federal Courts of Appeals for the 10th Circuit
wrote and asked for data about us and our work so at the very least he is
acquainted with that web site.
I am one of Mike Newdow's researchers
I get email that says you are wrong. Email that says all sorts of people
read that web site and I get email from time to time from people
commenting on my posts.
My posts in 1995 led to a email invitation from a Associate professor at U
of Louisville asking me to help him create a website on church state
separation Thus in Jan 1996 The Separation of Church and State Home Page
came into being and ran from Jan 1996 to Nov 1997 though it remained on
line until June 1999 http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnpintro.htm
and received almost 100,000 hits
I have posted a thousands of posts since Feb 1995 when I posted my very
first post in UseNet Newgroups and I would say that thousands of them have
been read and there are still posts of mine being read now.
I have separation of church and state Yahoo group which I spend time at
and post some on the Secular Web as well. So I don't do a whole lot here
anymore beyond posting the daily church state news thingies and if you
notice I don't pay much attention to them once I post them. Often times
don't even read replies to then when there are replies
Mainly I stopped taking a more active rile in the newsgroups because I was
bored. People who actually were able to generate decent discussions in the
areas i am interested in left and all that remains are trolls like u fred
dana strickland and the like
No challenge there, rather boring.
But, I am still active and still doing things. Even the daily news thingies
I post get reactions from people at times and though they are not my
posts, I didn't write them, they are being read by people.
So once more you have been shown to be full of it
Have a nice day
******************************************************
Since your unsubstantiated claim was trashed and you couldn't really
salvage it, you appear to have tone the Kandufus shuffle and change the
subject:
:|I hope every webmaster noted that Buckeye just admitted to using his
:|posts to spam a website (intentionally), and is using hits on that
:|website to show the effectiveness of his posts. Thus, his links are
:|not meant to be a signature (like mine) to tell who he is but his posts
:|are intentional ads.
Another unsubstantiated and incorrect and lying claim by kandufus
FACTS, something you are seldom ever on speaking terms with.
My posts , be them the recent church state in the news type or
historically and or legally challenged propaganda of the radicals religious
right types havce the same function and purpose. To inform, educate, set
the record straight, give the rest of the story etc.
I have been doing since since Feb 1995 and probably will continue to do it
for a long time to come.
I also take great pleasure in trashing you each and every time I see you
wandering off into the legal and or historical side of the topic of church
state separation and posting your lame, lacking and incorrect version of
either.
I also take great pleasure in bugging you when you whine and bawl about me.
Otherwise I don't pay much attention to you
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the US and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
22 May 2006 12:28:31 PM |
|
|
In article <1148305416.432783.94400@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
buckeye-elo@nospam.net wrote:
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
:|. . . I'd be like Buckeye that
:|everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
Gee guy, you can't even get that right either.
I do love to run across things like that so I can make you look foolish
it is so easy to do.
Let's see
I have a website that a good portion of the items on it were put
together, written, edited of otherwise collected by me.
As of today that sitre since July 1998 has received 1,121,837 visits and
2,326,326 page views.
Apparently I am not being ignored that much.
I hope every webmaster noted that Buckeye just admitted to using his
posts to spam a website (intentionally), and is using hits on that
website to show the effectiveness of his posts. Thus, his links are
not meant to be a signature (like mine) to tell who he is but his posts
are intentional ads.
"Ads"?
What is Buckeye selling there; I seem unable to find his shop?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
22 May 2006 09:52:30 AM |
|
|
Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
buckeye-elo@nospam.net wrote:
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
:|. . . I'd be like Buckeye that
:|everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
Gee guy, you can't even get that right either.
I do love to run across things like that so I can make you look foolish
it is so easy to do.
Let's see
I have a website that a good portion of the items on it were put
together, written, edited of otherwise collected by me.
As of today that sitre since July 1998 has received 1,121,837 visits and
2,326,326 page views.
Apparently I am not being ignored that much.
I hope every webmaster noted that Buckeye just admitted to using his
posts to spam a website (intentionally), and is using hits on that
website to show the effectiveness of his posts. Thus, his links are
not meant to be a signature (like mine) to tell who he is but his posts
are intentional ads.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
Really? Someone has the ability to post their opinion and they do and
then they post a link to more of their opinion? Wow! Who'd'a thunk!
I'm happy you let me know that posting a link to your own stuff is like
advertising. That's almost too deep for the crowd here.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 01:34:29 PM |
|
|
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
Zadok wrote:
"Wide Eyed in Blunder" <> wrote in message ...
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
Kenny nobody gives a ***** what you say.
Do you think that matters to me? However, the constant attacks on me
only verify my threats ot your worldview.
No, it verifies that you have painted a big bullseye on yourself and
labeled it "hit me".
Isn't that the view of the Da Vinci makers...controversy causes attention?
I doubt it.
Your attacks on me bring me attention
I doubt it.
and give foundation to my statements.
How?
If no one
really cared (or protested my statements), I'd be like Buckeye that
everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
You haven't been reading buckeye's posts for 10 years, or you would
make no such claim.
But I will go see it!!
And when I want truth, I'll go to the Gospel of Philip, that tells me that
Jesus was married!!
So...a later historical document than the other gospels,
Prove it.
one never quoted or used by Jesus apostles in their writing,
Neither were any of the books, duh. They hadn't yet been written.
one rejected by the early church,
Possible evidence that it is truth.
and one with literary and factual contradictons within
itself.
Sounds like all the other books of the Bible.
See my other post about how gullible atheists are.
Not as gullible as you are.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Derek Janssen" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 01:42:56 PM |
|
|
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
Kenny nobody gives a ***** what you say.
Do you think that matters to me? However, the constant attacks on me
only verify my threats ot your worldview.
No, it verifies that you have painted a big bullseye on yourself and
labeled it "hit me".
Uh, I believe the proper term is "Kick me", and which label is usually
applied by other people (or at least not with such self-voluntary
enthusiasm)
And for much the same general reasons. :)
Derek Janssen
ejanss@comcast.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 02:05:30 PM |
|
|
In article <rg3s621m0ai5n8e8f0fu1jn5hfs2jo2trl@4ax.com> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> writes:
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
Zadok wrote:
{...}
And when I want truth, I'll go to the Gospel of Philip, that tells me that
Jesus was married!!
So...a later historical document than the other gospels,
Prove it.
one never quoted or used by Jesus apostles in their writing,
Neither were any of the books, duh. They hadn't yet been written.
So then, Ken DID say that?
Geez, I thought I had to be reading something wrong. Guess not.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Derek Janssen" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 12:53:43 PM |
|
|
Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
Do you think that matters to me?
Matters to YOU, or you still wouldn't be trying to name-brand your
posts, either.
However, the constant attacks on me
only verify my threats ot your worldview. Isn't that the view of the
Da Vinci makers...controversy causes attention? Your attacks on me
bring me attention and give foundation to my statements. If no one
really cared (or protested my statements), I'd be like Buckeye that
everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
Oh, so, "When you hit a bad vaudeville comic with a tomato, he's easier
to *see* on stage, then?"
Yeah, maybe....But it's still fun. And easier to aim at. :)
Derek Janssen (pretty soon, you'll want to strangle the guy who said
there's "no such thing as bad publicity")
ejanss@comcast.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 01:29:51 PM |
|
|
In article <F-udnV9T6uqimPPZnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@comcast.com> Derek Janssen <ejanss@nospam.comcast.net> writes:
Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
Do you think that matters to me?
Matters to YOU, or you still wouldn't be trying to name-brand your
posts, either.
However, the constant attacks on me
only verify my threats ot your worldview. Isn't that the view of the
Da Vinci makers...controversy causes attention? Your attacks on me
bring me attention and give foundation to my statements. If no one
really cared (or protested my statements), I'd be like Buckeye that
everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
Oh, so, "When you hit a bad vaudeville comic with a tomato, he's easier
to *see* on stage, then?"
Yeah, maybe....But it's still fun. And easier to aim at. :)
Hey, if you think THAT's full-bore rationalizing, you ought to check out
noted christian netkook Andrew B Chung, who last month won not one,
but TWO kook awards -- and the very first time he was nominated,
too. No mean feat.
Chung's reaction -- and mind you, one of these was the coveted
"72 Raisins Crackpot Religion Award" -- was that God had orchestrated
this so that Chung, as a fisher of men, would have yet more ... you
know, fish...to proselytize.
So you see, Ken's only a sigma or so out. Much stranger yet lie
beyond.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
21 May 2006 03:48:36 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 19 May 2006 13:29:51 -0500, Cary Kittrell wrote
(in article <e4l2qv$poa$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu>):
In article <F-udnV9T6uqimPPZnZ2dnUVZ_uudnZ2d@comcast.com> Derek Janssen
<ejanss@nospam.comcast.net> writes:
Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
Do you think that matters to me?
Matters to YOU, or you still wouldn't be trying to name-brand your
posts, either.
However, the constant attacks on me
only verify my threats ot your worldview. Isn't that the view of the
Da Vinci makers...controversy causes attention? Your attacks on me
bring me attention and give foundation to my statements. If no one
really cared (or protested my statements), I'd be like Buckeye that
everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
Oh, so, "When you hit a bad vaudeville comic with a tomato, he's easier
to *see* on stage, then?"
Yeah, maybe....But it's still fun. And easier to aim at. :)
Hey, if you think THAT's full-bore rationalizing, you ought to check out
noted christian netkook Andrew B Chung, who last month won not one,
but TWO kook awards -- and the very first time he was nominated,
too. No mean feat.
Chung's reaction -- and mind you, one of these was the coveted
"72 Raisins Crackpot Religion Award" -- was that God had orchestrated
this so that Chung, as a fisher of men, would have yet more ... you
know, fish...to proselytize.
So you see, Ken's only a sigma or so out. Much stranger yet lie
beyond.
-- cary
Like Steve Jobs being awarded the first Steve Jobs Award?
++ gray / "Wired Rave Awards" /
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 02:14:53 PM |
|
|
Wide Eyed in Wonder wrote:
Zadok wrote:
"Wide Eyed in Blunder" <> wrote in message ...
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
Kenny nobody gives a ***** what you say.
Do you think that matters to me? However, the constant attacks on me
only verify my threats ot your worldview. Isn't that the view of the
Da Vinci makers...controversy causes attention? Your attacks on me
bring me attention and give foundation to my statements. If no one
really cared (or protested my statements), I'd be like Buckeye that
everyone just ignores and never reads the posts of.
Here's the truth about what we think about you:
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/writingken.html
It's been updated with a comic book cover about you. We mock you
because you're a fool.
--
Alric Knebel
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html
http://www.ironeyefortress.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dore" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
25 May 2006 08:19:08 PM |
|
|
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
People will go see the film. They will be filled with questions
like...is that really true...did that really happen...etc. Where will
they go for the truth. Right now there are over 40 books on the market
with the truth. These books like Cracking Da Vinci's Code are written
by those with advanced degrees (this book specifically has authors with
advanced degrees from Princeton, Drew, and Harvard.) You find in
these books what you won't find in Brown's book or the movie,
verifiable footnotes and sources to check.
The Da Vinci code is FICTION, which means that it is NOT true. The ONLY
place to go to find the truth is the Bible.
--
Dore
www.dorewilliamson.com
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
The Da Vinci Code is one of the greatest chances for people to learn
the truth, in spite of it's fiction...or, more specifically, BECAUSE of
it's fiction. The author says it is fiction. The film makers say it
is fiction. In fact, Sony (the film's makers) put up a website where
Christian ministers could tell the truth behind the story.
People will go see the film. They will be filled with questions
like...is that really true...did that really happen...etc. Where will
they go for the truth. Right now there are over 40 books on the market
with the truth. These books like Cracking Da Vinci's Code are written
by those with advanced degrees (this book specifically has authors with
advanced degrees from Princeton, Drew, and Harvard.) You find in
these books what you won't find in Brown's book or the movie,
verifiable footnotes and sources to check.
Personally, I think Sony is making this film just to destroy it. They
picked a maker of Christian favored films to make it (Ron Howard), a
man that played a false minister to be the lead (Tom Hanks..false
minister in The Ladykillers), according to recent reports edited out
the most controversial statements from the book, and set up a website
(as mentioned before) of ministers to tell the truth. This very well
could be a Christian attempt to downplay and yet profit from the story,
but I think you should go see it anyway...then, read the truth.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Brze" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
27 May 2006 09:00:32 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 26 May 2006 01:19:08 GMT, "Dore" <dorewilliamson@verizon.net>
wrote:
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
People will go see the film. They will be filled with questions
like...is that really true...did that really happen...etc. Where will
they go for the truth. Right now there are over 40 books on the market
with the truth. These books like Cracking Da Vinci's Code are written
by those with advanced degrees (this book specifically has authors with
advanced degrees from Princeton, Drew, and Harvard.) You find in
these books what you won't find in Brown's book or the movie,
verifiable footnotes and sources to check.
The Da Vinci code is FICTION, which means that it is NOT true. The ONLY
place to go to find the truth is the Bible.
And the only person who knows the truth in the Bible is Christ. Don't
just read the Bible, searching for the guidance of Jesus Christ is
equally important.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 01:27:00 PM |
|
|
"Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> wrote:
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
You are incapable of recognizing the truth.
The Da Vinci Code is one of the greatest chances for people to learn
the truth,
Not if you are an example.
Personally, I think Sony is making this film just to destroy it.
That's at least as silly as most of the other things you have thought.
but I think you should go see it anyway...then, read the truth.
"the truth" implies that there is an actual series of events
corresponding to the fictional events being described, such that the
latter is a perversion of the former.
So please tell me where we will find and read the "true" story of
Christ's marriage and the conspiracy of the Catholic church to
cover-up of that marriage.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 01:47:47 PM |
|
|
In article <1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
For those in our audience tuning in late, let's do a quick recap:
What Ken is doing here is a pre-emptive back and fill.
See, he's long argued that the great popularity of the Narnia
movie and the Passion of the Christs proves that Christian themes
attract a wide audience, despite the machinations of the "liberal media",
who want such movies to fail precisely because of those Christian
themes. [1]
And conversely, he's claimed that the minimal success of movies along
the line of The Last Temptation of Christ proves that movies offensive
to Christians will not do well, no matter how hard the liberal atheistic
elite attempt to drum up interest.
But now there's some reason to think that a movie possibly even
more offensive that The Last Temptation may do smashingly well,
in direct contradiction to all this.
Dreadful. If that comes to pass, what's a boy to do?
Well, one approach would be to quickly change the subject. Wait,
I've got it: if every man, woman and child in America sees
The DaVinci Code (hopefully twice), that will actually be --
ready now? -- that will actually be A HUGE TRIUMPH FOR CHRISTIANITY!!!
Spin. It's ugly when politicians do it.
But when somone pretending to be on the side of the angels
resorts to it, it's more distasteful.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alric Knebel" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 03:17:58 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
For those in our audience tuning in late, let's do a quick recap:
What Ken is doing here is a pre-emptive back and fill.
See, he's long argued that the great popularity of the Narnia
movie and the Passion of the Christs proves that Christian themes
attract a wide audience, despite the machinations of the "liberal media",
who want such movies to fail precisely because of those Christian
themes. [1]
And conversely, he's claimed that the minimal success of movies along
the line of The Last Temptation of Christ proves that movies offensive
to Christians will not do well, no matter how hard the liberal atheistic
elite attempt to drum up interest.
But now there's some reason to think that a movie possibly even
more offensive that The Last Temptation may do smashingly well,
in direct contradiction to all this.
Dreadful. If that comes to pass, what's a boy to do?
Well, one approach would be to quickly change the subject. Wait,
I've got it: if every man, woman and child in America sees
The DaVinci Code (hopefully twice), that will actually be --
ready now? -- that will actually be A HUGE TRIUMPH FOR CHRISTIANITY!!!
Spin. It's ugly when politicians do it.
But when somone pretending to be on the side of the angels
resorts to it, it's more distasteful.
If people are so thrilled over movies with Christian themes, he needs to
take a look at "End of the Spear," a movie that was overtly Christian,
about Christians, and it was about Christians who died converting
natives. But because it didn't have some spectacular presentation of
gore ("The Passion") or magical talking animals ("Narnia"), it came and
went without any fanfare among moviegoers, even Christian ones.
Evidently even they want their Christianity served up with a lot of FX
bling.
--
Alric Knebel
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html
http://www.ironeyefortress.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 03:27:27 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
For those in our audience tuning in late, let's do a quick recap:
What Ken is doing here is a pre-emptive back and fill.
See, he's long argued that the great popularity of the Narnia
movie and the Passion of the Christs proves that Christian themes
attract a wide audience, despite the machinations of the "liberal media",
who want such movies to fail precisely because of those Christian
themes. [1]
And conversely, he's claimed that the minimal success of movies along
the line of The Last Temptation of Christ proves that movies offensive
to Christians will not do well, no matter how hard the liberal atheistic
elite attempt to drum up interest.
But now there's some reason to think that a movie possibly even
more offensive that The Last Temptation may do smashingly well,
in direct contradiction to all this.
Dreadful. If that comes to pass, what's a boy to do?
Well, one approach would be to quickly change the subject. Wait,
I've got it: if every man, woman and child in America sees
The DaVinci Code (hopefully twice), that will actually be --
ready now? -- that will actually be A HUGE TRIUMPH FOR CHRISTIANITY!!!
Spin. It's ugly when politicians do it.
But when somone pretending to be on the side of the angels
resorts to it, it's more distasteful.
-- cary
Cary, if they don't go see it, Christians won't get an audience to sell
to. If they do see it, only Christians will have the answer. I DO
wholeheartedly want them and you to see it...then seek the truth.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 03:39:01 PM |
|
|
In article <1148070447.467354.17110@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
For those in our audience tuning in late, let's do a quick recap:
What Ken is doing here is a pre-emptive back and fill.
See, he's long argued that the great popularity of the Narnia
movie and the Passion of the Christs proves that Christian themes
attract a wide audience, despite the machinations of the "liberal media",
who want such movies to fail precisely because of those Christian
themes. [1]
And conversely, he's claimed that the minimal success of movies along
the line of The Last Temptation of Christ proves that movies offensive
to Christians will not do well, no matter how hard the liberal atheistic
elite attempt to drum up interest.
But now there's some reason to think that a movie possibly even
more offensive that The Last Temptation may do smashingly well,
in direct contradiction to all this.
Dreadful. If that comes to pass, what's a boy to do?
Well, one approach would be to quickly change the subject. Wait,
I've got it: if every man, woman and child in America sees
The DaVinci Code (hopefully twice), that will actually be --
ready now? -- that will actually be A HUGE TRIUMPH FOR CHRISTIANITY!!!
Spin. It's ugly when politicians do it.
But when somone pretending to be on the side of the angels
resorts to it, it's more distasteful.
-- cary
Cary, if they don't go see it, Christians won't get an audience to sell
to. If they do see it, only Christians will have the answer. I DO
wholeheartedly want them and you to see it...then seek the truth.
Since most people in this country are Christian already, if this silly
film turns out to be a blockbuster, this will mean merely that lots of
Christians went to see it.
If only non-Christians go, the numbers will be so poor that it will
disappear from theaters in two weeks.
But if Christians "selling" to other Christians makes you happy, then
who am I to cavil?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 04:03:55 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148070447.467354.17110@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
For those in our audience tuning in late, let's do a quick recap:
What Ken is doing here is a pre-emptive back and fill.
See, he's long argued that the great popularity of the Narnia
movie and the Passion of the Christs proves that Christian themes
attract a wide audience, despite the machinations of the "liberal media",
who want such movies to fail precisely because of those Christian
themes. [1]
And conversely, he's claimed that the minimal success of movies along
the line of The Last Temptation of Christ proves that movies offensive
to Christians will not do well, no matter how hard the liberal atheistic
elite attempt to drum up interest.
But now there's some reason to think that a movie possibly even
more offensive that The Last Temptation may do smashingly well,
in direct contradiction to all this.
Dreadful. If that comes to pass, what's a boy to do?
Well, one approach would be to quickly change the subject. Wait,
I've got it: if every man, woman and child in America sees
The DaVinci Code (hopefully twice), that will actually be --
ready now? -- that will actually be A HUGE TRIUMPH FOR CHRISTIANITY!!!
Spin. It's ugly when politicians do it.
But when somone pretending to be on the side of the angels
resorts to it, it's more distasteful.
-- cary
Cary, if they don't go see it, Christians won't get an audience to sell
to. If they do see it, only Christians will have the answer. I DO
wholeheartedly want them and you to see it...then seek the truth.
Since most people in this country are Christian already, if this silly
film turns out to be a blockbuster, this will mean merely that lots of
Christians went to see it.
If only non-Christians go, the numbers will be so poor that it will
disappear from theaters in two weeks.
But if Christians "selling" to other Christians makes you happy, then
who am I to cavil?
-- cary
All of that to agree that this movie's success will empower Christian
product sales and fund the church. Thank you for your honest
confession.
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Zadok" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 05:19:28 PM |
|
|
"Wide Eyed in Blunder" <> wrote in message
All of that to agree that this movie's success will empower Christian
product sales and fund the church. Thank you for your honest
confession.
What do you expect from a SPAMMER. It's all about product sales.
***** Kenny, go down to the nearest theatre and sell Jesus and Magdalene
wedding rings and make real money.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
19 May 2006 04:17:59 PM |
|
|
In article <1148072635.607298.265180@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148070447.467354.17110@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
For those in our audience tuning in late, let's do a quick recap:
What Ken is doing here is a pre-emptive back and fill.
See, he's long argued that the great popularity of the Narnia
movie and the Passion of the Christs proves that Christian themes
attract a wide audience, despite the machinations of the "liberal media",
who want such movies to fail precisely because of those Christian
themes. [1]
And conversely, he's claimed that the minimal success of movies along
the line of The Last Temptation of Christ proves that movies offensive
to Christians will not do well, no matter how hard the liberal atheistic
elite attempt to drum up interest.
But now there's some reason to think that a movie possibly even
more offensive that The Last Temptation may do smashingly well,
in direct contradiction to all this.
Dreadful. If that comes to pass, what's a boy to do?
Well, one approach would be to quickly change the subject. Wait,
I've got it: if every man, woman and child in America sees
The DaVinci Code (hopefully twice), that will actually be --
ready now? -- that will actually be A HUGE TRIUMPH FOR CHRISTIANITY!!!
Spin. It's ugly when politicians do it.
But when somone pretending to be on the side of the angels
resorts to it, it's more distasteful.
-- cary
Cary, if they don't go see it, Christians won't get an audience to sell
to. If they do see it, only Christians will have the answer. I DO
wholeheartedly want them and you to see it...then seek the truth.
Since most people in this country are Christian already, if this silly
film turns out to be a blockbuster, this will mean merely that lots of
Christians went to see it.
If only non-Christians go, the numbers will be so poor that it will
disappear from theaters in two weeks.
But if Christians "selling" to other Christians makes you happy, then
who am I to cavil?
-- cary
All of that to agree that this movie's success will empower Christian
product sales and fund the church. Thank you for your honest
confession.
And Christians swapping money with other Christians is a non-zero-sum
situation how, exactly?
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wide Eyed in Wonder" |
|
| Title: Re: Please...go see the Da Vinci Code |
20 May 2006 08:33:57 AM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148072635.607298.265180@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148070447.467354.17110@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1148048086.184263.54160@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "Wide Eyed in Wonder" <kands00@hotmail.com> writes:
So there is no mistaking it, I'll say it up front. Please, go see the
Da Vinci Code. I WANT you to go see it. Then, go see the truth.
For those in our audience tuning in late, let's do a quick recap:
What Ken is doing here is a pre-emptive back and fill.
See, he's long argued that the great popularity of the Narnia
movie and the Passion of the Christs proves that Christian themes
attract a wide audience, despite the machinations of the "liberal media",
who want such movies to fail precisely because of those Christian
themes. [1]
And conversely, he's claimed that the minimal success of movies along
the line of The Last Temptation of Christ proves that movies offensive
to Christians will not do well, no matter how hard the liberal atheistic
elite attempt to drum up interest.
But now there's some reason to think that a movie possibly even
more offensive that The Last Temptation may do smashingly well,
in direct contradiction to all this.
Dreadful. If that comes to pass, what's a boy to do?
Well, one approach would be to quickly change the subject. Wait,
I've got it: if every man, woman and child in America sees
The DaVinci Code (hopefully twice), that will actually be --
ready now? -- that will actually be A HUGE TRIUMPH FOR CHRISTIANITY!!!
Spin. It's ugly when politicians do it.
But when somone pretending to be on the side of the angels
resorts to it, it's more distasteful.
-- cary
Cary, if they don't go see it, Christians won't get an audience to sell
to. If they do see it, only Christians will have the answer. I DO
wholeheartedly want them and you to see it...then seek the truth.
Since most people in this country are Christian already, if this silly
film turns out to be a blockbuster, this will mean merely that lots of
Christians went to see it.
If only non-Christians go, the numbers will be so poor that it will
disappear from theaters in two weeks.
But if Christians "selling" to other Christians makes you happy, then
who am I to cavil?
-- cary
All of that to agree that this movie's success will empower Christian
product sales and fund the church. Thank you for your honest
confession.
And Christians swapping money with other Christians is a non-zero-sum
situation how, exactly?
-- cary
Wow. Are you really that dense, or are you pretending to not know that
Christians are people and the book sellers are ministry organizations
that also put out many other Christian products (funded by Da Vinci
correcting material sales)?
Ken Clifton
http://www.lulu.com/writingken
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
