OK, which is it?

[mcdirector]

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?

 

[rbell]

We Christians are one of the worst groups for 'killing our wounded'.

When someone makes a mistake, our job is to lift them up, not to kick them while they're down. :godisgood:

Now now...SFIC strongly condemns all actors as hypocrites in one thread, and recommends a movie in another!!

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."

1. No one has jumped on SFIC personally but rather pointed out problems with his views.
2. Remove thy beam first.

 

[I Am Blessed 24]

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.......

 

[rbell]

Okey dokey...

and you are right that Christians often do...

 

[Gershom]

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.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

In a halloween thread, there was this quote by SFIC:



A couple of other folks chimed in and agreed, yea indeed, acting is bad...

av1611jim said,


Rufus1611 said,


BUT THEN, just a few threads later, SFIC chimed in on a movie thread:



So, sfic, if actors are hypocrites, and "pretending to be someone you're not" is an abomination, how can you recommend a movie? Aren't you, by your own actions, causing a brother to sin?

You can't have it both ways.

If you have ever watched the Thief in the Night series, all the people who are in the movies play them selves. Patty Dunning plays Patty Dunning. Her husband Jim, plays himself. Jerry, Diane, Susan, Sandy, Wenda, all of them play themselves. So they are not wearing masks of other people.

There is no contradiction in sfiC's post concerning actors.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

Now now...SFIC strongly condemns all actors as hypocrites in one thread, and recommends a movie in another!!

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."

1. No one has jumped on SFIC personally but rather pointed out problems with his views.
2. Remove thy beam first.

As pointed out in my above post, there is no inconsistancy in sfiC's post since these characters in the Thief in the Night series that sfiC reccommended do indeed play themselves. How do I know this? I have the videos.

 

[rbell]

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:

If you have ever watched the Thief in the Night series, all the people who are in the movies play them selves. Patty Dunning plays Patty Dunning. Her husband Jim, plays himself. Jerry, Diane, Susan, Sandy, Wenda, all of them play themselves. So they are not wearing masks of other people.

Now that's just silly.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

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:

That child may not be promoting the sins that the Biblical character commited, but that child is guilty of one thing for sure...

Hypocrisy!

What is a Hypocrite? A pretender; a false professor; insincerity. The Greek word hypokrites referred to a play actor who wore a mask to represent an identity other than his own.

A parent who allows his or her child to wear masks depicting them of being or representing anyone other than who that child actually is, is condoning hypocrisy in that child.

sfiC's statement was about one playing a person that he was not. These men and women in the Thief in the Night series portrayed themselves. They were not being hypocritical.

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.

 

[Filmproducer]

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.

 

[webdog]

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

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

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

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

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.

The people were not portraying people they were not.

 

[webdog]

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

NOT what Scripture says...
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.

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

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.

 

[webdog]

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.

Which occured first?

 

[His Blood Spoke My Name]

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.

 

[Hope of Glory]

The people were not portraying people they were not.

So, they were really and truly people in the tribulation period?

Time travel to get the cameras there and back, or what?

 

[Filmproducer]

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: