You know, I didn't see any kickin' on this thread. I saw questions (and a brilliant threadjack). Isn't asking about what people say how we learn what they really mean?
OK, which is it?
Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by rbell, Nov 2, 2006.
Page 6 of 6
-
-
How in the world is that "killing our wounded?" Check each and every post of mine. Not one personal attack on SFIC, but rather a pointing out that he has a serious inconsistency in his views.
1611jim, it's funny to see you admonishing anyone for "jumping on a brother."
- No one has jumped on SFIC personally but rather pointed out problems with his views.
- Remove thy beam first.
-
rbell: My post was 'in general', not to anyone specifically.
Be that as it may, we Christians DO tend to kill our wounded instead of reconciling.
Seventy times seven....... -
Okey dokey...
and you are right that Christians often do... -
It's not a question of personal attacks, or 70x7 forgiveness, or vultures. SFIC points out error in others on the BB, and he is experiencing the same now. Some are wanting to know how he reconciles his apparent contradictory stance, that's all.
-
There is no contradiction in sfiC's post concerning actors. -
-
I'm not sure why you're resurrecting this thread, but...
-Nope. SFIC condemned ALL actors. These guys were acting. Thus, he (SFIC) should not have recommended this movie if he were going to be consistent.
-Furthermore...you're taking a word that is a colloquialism, and was used as such ("hypocrite" and the allusion to actors and masks) and taking it in a literal sense. It would be like my saying, "I'm so hungry I could eat a horse!" and someone goes and cooks one for me.
SFIC got caught trying to defend a ridiculous position--that wearing a mask is sinful...that all actors are sinning...then recommending a movie.
And, since you will never, never, ever allow yourself to disagree with SFIC, even when his point cannot be logically defended, you came up with a very imaginative, though silly explanation:
-
Nothing silly about it.
They were not acting as other people. They used their own names.
sfiC's argument was against people acting as other people. Here is his OP:
And neither was sfiC!
Nothing imaginative about my post at all. I have the movies and know the ones in the movies portrayed themselves. They were not taking on the identity of others. -
But HBSMN, they were still ACTING! The camera was not documenting real life events. There is absolutely no difference. Acting is acting regardelss of what character the actor is portraying.
-
Jesus seemed to be a fine actor Himself...
So they drew near to the village to which they were going. He acted as if he were going farther,
but they urged him strongly, saying, “Stay with us, for it is toward evening and the day is now far spent.” So he went in to stay with them.
Luke 24:28-29 -
No doubt if the two on the road to Emmaeus had not persuaded Him to tarry, He would have continued on His journey.
As a matter of fact, the Scripture clearly shows this when it says that they persuaded Him to tarry. Had He wanted to tarry, He would not have had to be persuaded.
Christ, in your example from Luke 24 was not portraying someone He was not. It has no relevance to the accusations made in the first post -
-
He acted as if he were going farther,
Doesn't say it was conditioned on being persuaded...but rather they tried to persuade Him because He was acting.
-
Luke 24:28-29 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went: and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us: for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.
They would not have had to constrain (compel, urge, persuade) Him to stay had He truly wanted to stay. -
-
Christ showed signs of wanting to continue, but they persuaded Him to stay. They would not have had to persuade Him if He wanted to stay.
-
Time travel to get the cameras there and back, or what? -
HBSMN, I really do not understand your "logic". Acting is only wrong if the actors portray someone other than themselves, but if the actor portrays themselves they are not wrong? You do realize that they are essentially playing a character with the same name, right? So tell me what is the difference between portraying someone else in an imaginary situation, and playing someone of your same name in an imaginary sitaution. A movie is not capturing real time events, unless of course it was a documentary. Do you believe that the TTITN series were documentaries? :laugh:
Page 6 of 6