Hindsight must be 20/20.
I still say sooner or later they're gonna have to claim that Armageddon already took place years ago.
i want to know if they have changed thier stance on weather jesus came back "invisibly" in 1914......?
.
are they sticking to this or slowley distancing themselves from it................. for all you km insiders [please expand] .
Hindsight must be 20/20.
I still say sooner or later they're gonna have to claim that Armageddon already took place years ago.
the recent post about "the passion of the christ" has gotten me thinkingabout violence in film in general, and i would very much like a fewperspectives on something... last year, after finally shedding the reflexive guilt that was instilledin me (by my wt steeping) towards violent stories, i finally saw a few iconic films, including a few from quentin tarantino.
(including reservoir dogs) now tarantino is know for his unflinching depiction of stylized violence.
(exactly the sort of thing that is specifically condemned by the wt) some film makers have this knack for making cruelty, death, and violence a odd spectacle of dark beauty.
What do you feel is a valid justification for not just realistic violence, but stylized violence in film or television?
Perhaps its value is in the purging effect that creating or viewing such works can generate. Traumatic events are often dealt with through artistic representations of the trauma.
For others, perhaps it gives a vicarious thrill to satisfy the bloodlust of some of our animal heritage.
From an artistic or journalistic standpoint, it may make some degree of commentary more palatable than pure realism allows (when pure realism can be so offensive to another set of our sensiblities). Perhaps we can see such expressions in a metaview, as comment on dichotomoies within our nature.
How do [Tarantino's] Ilk, and people who enjoy his work (including me, on occasion) sleep at night?
Perhaps knowing that each person is responsible for their own actions helps. I hardly believe Tarantino is inventing the dynamics depicted in his films; rather, he may be expressing facets of the world he sees, for a number of reasons. Perhaps we all sleep at night knowing that we may have dark impulses within us, but that we are much larger than just that.
I find one archtype more and more (over, say, the past 15 years or so) getting used in film: the creation of the "justified victim". Mainstream Hollywood film in particular will carefully develop one or more characters as guilty of something which makes them deserving of suffering or death. Once the "victim" is clarly delineated, the audience finds it emotionally acceptable for them to meet their doom. In some ways, I guess that making the victim of violence "bad" makes it ok for us to witness the grotesque. It at least puts a veneer of civility over our interest in seeing violence played out, or participating in heroic wish-fulfillment fantasies. But it also may be reinforcing a cultural hypnotic trance where "bad" things only happen to "bad" people.
On the whole, though, aren't most viewers aware of the distinction between fantasy and reality? Do we not find something within ourselves to examine when considering what a filmmaker puts in front of our eyes? Would that be a sufficient reason to "bless" the work?
it's no secret that the "organization" has increased it's cia, national security clerance only super-secret attitude in regards to the elder school that is going to be conducted soon.
a few days ago, i had a conversation with an elder who has been in the fold all of his life practically.
in keeping with the conversation style of jws, the gentleman told me that nobody knows what exactly will be taught at the meetings, but in his backdoor conversations with some brothers who seem to be tuned into the bethel's officially, unofficial, communications network, the elders are going to be taught "post-armageddon" teachings.
Wouldn't the ultimate New Light be that Armageddon occurred invisibly in 1975?
try this on the next jw you meet:.
1. ask the jw what religious group jesus selected in 1919 to be his faithful and discreet slave organisation?
the jw will answer: "pastor russell & the bible students"good!!.
God helps his true servants understand his will gradually
...perhaps then "his" organization will catch up with the rest of us someday...
well lets get off to a good start for the year by using jesus to justify staying with your abusive husband:.
thursday, january 3. when [jesus] was being reviled, he did not go reviling in return.
when he was suffering, he did not go threatening.-1 pet.
I always love jgnat's posts...!
http://ffrf.org/quiz/bquiz.php.
we found this quiz after reading the book parenting beyond belief and sweetpea and i decided to take the challenge - afterall how difficult can 50 bible questions be for us born and brought up as jw's?.
our results were enlightening to say the least - we both scored 28/50 - not exactly brilliant although apparently above average.. take the quiz and post your results and comments..
41 of 50. Fun!
personally i am a agnostic with a complete rejection of a personal god.
without the concept of salvation my belief structure states that when i die, very likely that is it.
no amount of good or bad deeds will extend my life past the point of my death.
Meaning is highly individual and subjective. What does a Beethoven symphony "mean"?
Don't each of us find "meaning" in diverse facets of life?
Good comments from all on an interesting topic.
i know the mormons go door to door and i have seen some church of god people occasionally.
who else has organized preaching ministries (door to door, etc.)?
i'm in an ongoing dialogue with relatives and this is one of their contentions - that the witnesses must have the truth (despite the many fallacies) because they are the only one that go door to door preaching.
Gideons place a lot of literature.
It takes the witnesses 4000 man hours to make a convert.
...and then it doesn't always "stick"!
well lets get off to a good start for the year by using jesus to justify staying with your abusive husband:.
thursday, january 3. when [jesus] was being reviled, he did not go reviling in return.
when he was suffering, he did not go threatening.-1 pet.
And so it goes...this has been in my awareness since the mid-60's, and the same tired garbage has been trotted out, along with "wait on Jehovah" to put things right.
Very well done!