THe only problem with the Left Behind movies is that they suck. The Chronicles of Narnia, though, looks like it's going to be excellent.

The Left Behind movies do suck. The books kinda suck too, I read the first three on the way to Israel (very long layover in London), but I quit because I realized that the series was never going to end! The books and the film are a good tool for evangelism, though- at least that's what I think. Last New Years Eve we had a friend over who had recently became a Christian, and we spent the whole nite explaining the book of Revelation to him after watching the movies. There are Media Company's like Grace Hill Media and Walden Media (the Christian Media Co. who produced "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe") who are coming to the forefront and raising the bar. We need more Christian Proffesionals, not just ministers, involved in all aspects of society.

So, are you saved Joshua?

Sarah,

You need more than Christian professionals. You need more real Christians. People who really follow Jesus.

Jesus did not start an army. He was persecuted, and in the face of this persecution - died, even though he could have started trouble via bodily conflict.

Jesus talked about unity with all things, and the kingdom of god being within man, not in some post life vacation resort.

So much effort is needed on the part of main stream christianity because in its essence, it has no power. Books upon books, persuasion upon persuasion, diggin proofs up upon proofs - all because inwardly you doubt.

This is why there are 'pre-approved' reading lists. It is indoctrination, and rightfully so - those who become familiar in practice and study of other religions begin to realize thier underlying unity.

By the way, my applaud to Josua for having links to ALMOST every possible perspective. You have left out though links related to spiritual sciences such as yoga, quantum pyshics and so forth.

The problem your having is that you have to convince people. You have to persuade - because what you are selling does not sell itself. This is not a quality of truth. ttruth is self-evident, and when presented carries a force of its own - atleast, to the open minded.

For example - do you believe the Hale Bop people are on a space rock flying through the universe right now?

-Blessings, M

I'd have to agree with Claybourn on this one. The "Left Behind" films are based on the filmmakers interpretations of the last days. But I believe if any film were ever to be fully based upon those days which are laid out in the Scripture, no one would ever believe what they were seeing. From an instructural standpoint, these films need to be addressed as loosley based upon the end times...not strictly based on Scripture. I don't think there's any harm in watching these films in Church, so long as they aren't heralded as completely sound doctrine.

I agree. The Left Behind books and movies are the authors & filmmakers' dramatic take on one particular school of eschatology. I haven't read the books, but I agree with Josh and Sarah that the movie(s) (I really didn't know there had been a sequel until I heard about the third) suck from an artistic point of view. I'll confess to having the first one on DVD, though, because it was probably the best Christian end-times film made at the time (and possibly still).

End Times?

hahahahahahaha

Hey, show me an end anywhere to be found?

Where does the sky end?

There are no ends, only changes.

Aren't changes just another word for times, Michael?

I don't worry too much about who's End Times eschatology is right; as I wrote on my blog a long time ago, Christians don't have two sets of instructions - one for most of the time and one for the Two Minute Warning. None of my life decisions are riding on it.

Joshua,

The words being dealt with were 'End' times, not 'times.'

The stressed word in said discussion being 'End.'

Point is, there is no end! Just like there is no end to the sky, or anything else in life.

Maybe we can call your armegedon, 'a significant change'

Eternity is right now, right here, where it has always been.

Think about it, no matter what time the clock reads, it is always accurate to say ,' Now...Now...Now..' - and once you say it, it is gone.

Major implications for the concept of heaven /hell if it is not possible to prove an 'end' present in our daily, sense perceptive existance.

Can it be said eternity can exist along side with finite reality, and that finite reality not be made up of eternity, and thus an illusion - such as the hindu's, buddhists and eastern spiritualities have been saying for thousands of years?

Please don't misunderstand me Michael, Christians don't look forward to any proverbial armegedon. But they are looking forward to a state of reality that's more real than the one we're in now. Heaven is a reality that is better than ours simply because the intropy laws do not exist there. Intropy meaning that all things go from order to disorder. Intropy is a factor of time and heaven is outside time. It's not just eternal, it's outside the dimentionality of time. That's why there's no ageing, no death, no disease. Of course the absents of sin has a lot to do with the absents of intropy in heaven, but I'm getting off the subject.

The point is, Christians are just looking forward to better days. Unfortunately, we know that the days ahead have to get worse before they get better. Simply because the ONE who is outside time said they would.

Joshua: The traditional method of dealing with trolls, ignoring them, has the difficulty of requiring complete cooperation from everyone else in the group. This makes it difficult to implement in real life. Therefore, I recommend solution Mark II: vicious mockery.

"Major implications for the concept of heaven /hell if it is not possible to prove an 'end' present in our daily, sense perceptive existance."

IME (and I have quite a bit), people who make statements with that particular grammatical structure (forgetting an introductory article or a form of the verb "to be" when they are introducing an idea) are almost invariably net.kooks, and should be dealt with accordingly. If you don't believe me, re-examine his statements on the concept of "eternity." As he gets more excited, he begins to sound more like the TimeCube guy.

Christians don't have two sets of instructions - one for most of the time and one for the Two Minute Warning.

Good point, Alan.

Michael,

I find it very interesting that you speak of "unity in all things" and the "quality of the truth selling itself" in the same post. It's like you're saying, "Christianity can't be true because everyone doesn't believe it" and that all "religions lead to God" in the same breath. How can supposed "unity in all things" and being "open minded" to every "perspective" have anything to do with what is actually, really the truth? For example, the LDS belief of who God is is completely different from my belief in who God is (Mormons believe we can all become god's and goddesses and rule over our own planet and have spirit children to worship us for all of eternity. I'm not trying to get in a Mormon doctrinal debate, just make an example), therefore only one can be true. Jesus does speak of the Kingdom of God being in the hearts of men, but he also speaks of Justification by Faith in Jesus Christ alone, which is made evident throughout the Bible. In fact, scripture says that God has set eternity in the hearts of men. That is why everyone, from the beginning of time, has been looking for someone or something to worship and to find their belief and purpose in.
I know nothing about any pre-approved reading lists, I'm a Protestant and I believe all the Bible and that salvation is only through faith in Christ alone. You can't quote part of the Bible and take scripture out of its context to support your claim of "unity in all things" so that people can justify their lifestyles and ease their consciences by living however they want because all paths lead to god. If you're 'gonna quote the Bible, then I assume you believe all of it, not just part of it.
And I don't even know how you pulled this debate out of the air anyway- all I said was that we need more Christian Professionsals producing works of quality, like Walden Media's "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe."

hahahahahahahahaha

I have never had one of my points contended because I failed to use proper grammer!

Good try A. Steve, but character bashing and personality attacks do not equate to logical, rational and adult like interaction.

I understand, though - it is a lot easier than thinking.

Sarah,

I did pretty much pull that arguement out of thin air. Great observation.

I want to address your questions.

It is true that all things are united. This is a scientific fact. It is also true, scientifically, that all things are seperate.

Wave or Particle? ACTUALLY = Wave AND Particle

AND THUS - Niether. = Holy Trinity

Instead of trying to dissect each and everything you said. Let me try another way. I am not avoiding your question, and if you feel where I am heading, after answering this coming qeustion, is avoidance, then you let me know.

Q: Is Jesus a means, and Heaven an End?

Steve,

how be me gramar on dis Ee male?

I'm sorry, Michael, you misunderstood me. I wasn't implying that you're using especially poor grammar. We all have our little grammar mistakes, and I'm not going to cast the first stone on that by any means. Instead, I was simply pointing out that the way in which you articulate yourself is strikingly similar to the TimeCube guy, Archimedes/Ludwig Plutonium, and even (though this is more of a stretch) Kurt/Wile E. Coyote, Ph.D.

Let's examine your last comment. First, your immediate resort to the ad hominem defense...the net.kook Smart1234 was notorious for this back on alt.sci.physics.new-theories. Most net.kooks rely heavily on this one, since they identify so completely with their theories that they mistake theoretical or factual disputation with personal attack. Oh, and they hate being told that they've bought into spurious pseudo-scientific theories and made themselves look like idiots. That probably plays into it, too.

Second, I direct you to your immediate assertion of "scientific fact" to back up your theory. This is another frequent net.kook term misuse. A "scientific fact" is something which has been proven repeatedly by observation. The connectedness of everything is an abstract concept, and therefore you should be using the term "widely-accepted theory." Personally, though, I'm not sure it's so widely-accepted, and I would like to see some peer-reviewed evidence for your assertion.

Third, and most kook-like, is this section:

Wave or Particle? ACTUALLY = Wave AND Particle
AND THUS - Niether. = Holy Trinity

The choppy attempt to reduce abstract metaphysical principles to mathematics, and then the "=" at the end attempting to prove the point is a classic net.kook style, and the erratic capitalization only emphasizes the oddity.

I should thank you, though. I never thought all that time spent on Usenet would come in handy, but I guess it has. I hope that others find this post at least somewhat useful, as well, as I have attempted to distill a few lessons for a wider audience. If you have any further questions (or just want to read some hilarious stuff), I encourage you to look over the old posts of James "Kibo" Parry, who has been making fools out of bizarre pseudo-scientists for over 20 years.

Michael,

I do think you're avoiding the question by hiding behind scientific sounding rhetoric. Don't answer a question with another question.

Sarah:

Sometimes a question can be best answered by another question. But, fair enough - I will address your concern exactly as you asked. But first I will deal with A. Steve.

A. Steve:

I am a little out of touch here. I do not know who those people are you mentioned - timecube guy and so forth. So I have no idea what your implying there.

" since they identify so completely with their theories that they mistake theoretical or factual disputation with personal attack. Oh, and they hate being told that they've bought into spurious pseudo-scientific theories and made themselves look like idiots. That probably plays into it, too." - A. STEVE

You have not actually told me directly that I have 'bought in' to a psuedo-science theory. I do believe you began our conversation with name calling, though - along with spending your mental energies on character attack, grammatical characterology (freedom of speech baby) instead of addressing the point I brought up.

It was in fact, your personal attack on me - such as...
'kook' and 'troll' which I consider the personal attack. You have, In Fact NOT OFFERED a factual disputation - only personality attacks and trying to trash the topic by trashing my particular approach in writing. So, what are you talking about A. Steve. It all sounds wiz kid, but, does not have much substance.

"Second, I direct you to your immediate assertion of "scientific fact" to back up your theory. This is another frequent net.kook term misuse. A "scientific fact" is something which has been proven repeatedly by observation. The connectedness of everything is an abstract concept, and therefore you should be using the term "widely-accepted theory." Personally, though, I'm not sure it's so widely-accepted, and I would like to see some peer-reviewed evidence for your assertion."
-A. STEVE

Well Steve, where is the peer reveiwed document proving heaven and hell, Jesus as the only Son of God? Do you need a peer reviewed document to know you have taken a crap?

Is it abstract that you head is connected to your neck, which in turn to your shoulders, arms, torso, hands so on and so forth. That your body is connected to the outside air, which is connected to all the flora ont he planet, which is connected to all the water, which is connect to the sun and the moon and the rest of the galaxy. Should we have a peer review to figure that out?

Interconnectedness as an abstract theory? Really?

Give me one example of something which is not interrated to everything on this planet. Lets leave scientific papers out of this for a second and deal with what we can see, touch, taste and feel. Please show me one thing not influenced by another.

"Third, and most kook-like, is this section:
Wave or Particle? ACTUALLY = Wave AND Particle
AND THUS - Niether. = Holy Trinity
The choppy attempt to reduce abstract metaphysical principles to mathematics, and then the "=" at the end attempting to prove the point is a classic net.kook style, and the erratic capitalization only emphasizes the oddity. "
- A. Steve

Wow, steve, there you go again trying to disprove something by attacking the personality offering it, and the manner in which it is offered instead of WHAT IS BEING OFFERED. Is everything which is not written according to A. Steve Proper Writing Standards false, kook like, and unreputable? For the THIRD time, in two letters, you have failed to address the point brought up, and instead attack the Manner in which it is brought up. You have a lot of big, empty words -which probably impress a lot of people who do not wish to think beyond your seeming confidence.

"and the erratic capitalization only emphasizes the oddity."
-A. Steve

Actually, there is no erractic capitalization. That would look sOmeTHing LikE THiS. I wrote ...

Third, and most kook-like, is this section:
Wave or Particle? ACTUALLY = Wave AND Particle
AND THUS - Niether. = Holy Trinity

I call it the written expression of tonal emphasis. This allows the reader to know certain words are being stressed - this conveyes Human Emotion. Are you human Steve?

But I applaud yet another effort of yours for content avoidance and character bashing!

I have a feeling your afraid to offer you input, so you sit afar and pick at this word, that CAPITALIZATION - this = symbol and try to topple a mountain by throwing few grains of sand, hoping your position will be strengthened by the act of throwing something - and further hoping no one notices you have not so much as even touched the mountain.

Its okay, Steve. Not everyone is ready to learn, and discuss. Do not confuse yourself, though - the lesson you have distilled is one of clever avoidance and the expression of superficial confidence.

You have shown that you can seemingly topple a partner in debate by skipping the topic entirely, and focusing on aspects of that partners approach in speaking/writing and working the attack from that space. You have distilled a lesson in impressionism and cleverness - but not intellegence, openness, honor, courage and thoughtfulness.

I thank you. I have dealt with far superior impressionists - those who have nothing to say but leave a taste in your mouth - and made small work of them, too.

I am just hoping you try to dispute anything which I have said - outside of how I say it, and how much a kook you would like your audience to think I am.

Blessings and Understanding to You A. Steve.

~`

I have said all that I have to say.

Sarah,

First of all, I feel through your writing you are a very kind and gentle person with a good heart.

1. "I find it very interesting that you speak of "unity in all things" and the "quality of the truth selling itself" in the same post. It's like you're saying, "Christianity can't be true because everyone doesn't believe it" and that all "religions lead to God" in the same breath."

God is God, Because of the Devil. Black is Black because of White. This is Unity.

Everything Leads to God - not just all religions. Even terrible people will one day find God, because there is NOTHING BUT GOD.

When I talk of 'selling' I am refering to the political propoganda which certain....religious groups partake in - which has nothing to do with Individual God Realization.

Furthermore, you have so many radio shows, hosts, books, clubs and so much more BECAUSE you need to constantly reiterate to yourselves the same thing over and over because if you left that enclosed comfortable space and studied other religions, practiced other religions, with the same effort you do christianity - you would find that Christianity, AS YOU KNOW IT NOW, is not the whole truth.

Concepts like 'Heaven when you die" and "Jesus is the only way" is not dissimilar from one nation saying to the world, "We have the only nuclear weapon"

Your leaders exploit you through your fears and hopes. You hope there is a kind fellow waiting for you in a nice palace in the sky when you die. They feed this hope, and then persuade you to 'Donate to your church, support this politician, support the murder of these people' on and on.

You do it, because you want to hang with that guy in heaven. It is all very sweet and touching. Such human vulnerability we have. We feel so naked and helpless in such a vast universe - so lost and needing a Big All Powerful Daddy, and his earthly ministers to shepard us poor stupid sheep.

Do not get me wrong, there is a God - the feeling of 'something is missing' is for a reason.

I am not saying drop your religion. Just EXPAND YOUR UNDERSTANDING. God is TOO much to be bottled up into such a limited concept. He is beyond concepts all together. And he is not a he, he is everything, and nothing.

I do not wish to stop your search, I am trying to say - look harder - look into meditation, read with an open mind - meaning, consider the reality you do not really know (which by the way is the case, as you do know)

2. "How can supposed "unity in all things" and being "open minded" to every "perspective" have anything to do with what is actually, really the truth? "

First of all, you do not Know the really real truth, otherwise you would not ask. You first have to be honest enough to state you believe yoru teachings, you do not know them to be the truth. There is a big difference.

This is why inwardly you doubt. You affirm this doubt by surrounding yourself with other who will not content your position but reinforce it. Your particular belief structure comforts an existential feeling of aloneness, and impermenance.

These are two things you Do know, very well. This is why Heaven is so appealing to you. Think about it.

The really real truth is beyond words, concepts - yet there are Many roads to get there.

Q:Give me One example in this world in which there is Only One Means to an End.

So to the paths to that 'beyong thought/time/space state" are many - they only seem different.

how to know? You must search. I have studied and practiced christianity, catholism, I live with mormans in Provo, Utah, I lived with Buddhists monks, Yoga practicioners, chi gung, thai chi - on and on. I have found they all lead to that same state of exhaltation - that thoughtless awareness state - where you are not seperate from the existence, from God.

Sadly, your very belief seperates you. Your very desire for heaven stops you from being there - Here and Now.

I could go on, but I feel this suffices. Please let me know if this is so.

3. "For example, the LDS belief of who God is is completely different from my belief in who God is (Mormons believe we can all become god's and goddesses and rule over our own planet and have spirit children to worship us for all of eternity. I'm not trying to get in a Mormon doctrinal debate, just make an example), therefore only one can be true. "

Not true. Niether of you really know. You both believe blindly. It is a terminal debate, because the only way you both can find out is by dying.

4. "That is why everyone, from the beginning of time, has been looking for someone or something to worship and to find their belief and purpose in. "

This is true. All beings seek happiness. All beings seek god - intelligently or not, we all have this in common. God has no choice but to put eternity in us - there is nothing but eternity/god.

5. "I know nothing about any pre-approved reading lists, I'm a Protestant and I believe all the Bible and that salvation is only through faith in Christ alone."

My apologies. I assumed incorrectly. I thought all evangelicals had pre-approved reading lists, or at minimum were discouraged to read / practice outside religions for research / learning.

Your salvation through Christ alone is metaphorical. This can be illumined by more research into other religions. Christ represents that though/space less state. Thus, you, as well as all of us, are only free/saved, when we again experience and know this state - our Core of Being, the Really Real. You call it Christ. Some call it Buddha, some call it Sat Chit Ananda, Some call it Nirvana, some call it heaven - same thing, different word.

6."You can't quote part of the Bible and take scripture out of its context to support your claim of "unity in all things" so that people can justify their lifestyles and ease their consciences by living however they want because all paths lead to god. "

My claim does not come from the bible, it comes from plain old daily observation/experience - as I have illumined for A. Steve.

Not all people have wieght on the consciousness. Does a child have a heavy conscience? Why Not? Because that child is beyond thought. It is not guilt ridden yet by religion.

What you have said above is your suppression of desires you want to express but are afraid to because you won't get invited to the great party in the sky. This is how you are controlled. What is it in your life you rather be doing?

Your not the judge of how others should live.

7."If you're 'gonna quote the Bible, then I assume you believe all of it, not just part of it."

A seemingly decent arguement. The Bible says, Thou Shalt Not Kill - and also states "there is a time for war."

That is a clear contradiction no matter how you cut the cake.

I was debating a creationist on the radio last week. dr. grady mcmurty - or something like that (cannot remember spelling of last name)

He said "the bible is 1. Infallable and that the Bible must be read through interpretation and that All men are fallable and thus cannot purely read the bible -so mistakes are made.

I pointed out to him that he just severed the head of his own arguement. If the bible is infallible, and it must be interpreted by man, and all man is fallibly interpreting it - then there is no one on the planet who can correctly decern the meanings! He was stunned - 20 seconds of silence passed, before he pulled a A. Steve on me and began attacking my personality and pretended as if we never had that particular talk.

My point is - you are claiming you know what the bible says - but you only knwo your interpretation - and MAYBE, some people agree with you. But I intepret it differently according to my context of life -w hich is utterly different than yours (yet essentially similar in our search for God)

So you cannot even assert you believe the whole bible, because you would be left without a belief at all. It is full of contradictions if you take it word for word - which is what you are implying - If you do not take it word for word, then it is all subjective interpretation and there is no fundemental, literal truth to it.

This is all for not though if you are unwilling to accept the fundemental truth that you do not really know what you claim is the truth to be true. You only hope. Hope is not truth.

May you find everything you seek, may understanding fill your heart and mind, may you be protected, and may you learn to shine your deep love upon all beings.

My Deep Wishes of spiritual success to you and all.

May we never rest until we know beyond doubt that we have found home.

With Deep Respect,

M

A. STEVE:

I know. Thanks for keeping quiet.

Cloud Ten Pictures made the decision to bypass the movie theaters for financial reasons and saved a lot of money on film lab costs, manufacturing and shipping of film prints, and advertising.

I worked on the theatrical release of the Christian film Time Changer in 2002. We had to spend almost $1000 for the manufacturing of each film print.

Earlier this year a friend and I briefly discussed forming a Christian film distribution company to focus on theatrical distribution but decided not to proceed because we lacked the capital to start such a company

In my opinion, releasing a movie in theaters give it credibility that these church showings will never achieve. Blockbuster, Hollywood Video and other retailers make purchasing decisions based on how much a movie grosses at the box office. Also, numerous newspapers and magazines will feature movie reviews if a film reaches the theaters.

In my opinion, releasing a movie in theaters give it credibility that these church showings will never achieve.

It's possible that they do not believe such credibiliity is essential with their target audience. I'm not sure building a business model on internet distributors like Netflix and Amazon will work, but it seems like a reasonable idea. A theatrical release will help them target a mass market, but they may be content with niche marketing. It seems to have worked reasonably well for Mary Kate and Ashley.

I agree.

Churches may feel like mass output could carry too many negative possibilities.

What if it bombs in the box office - how will that make christians feel?

What if it receives negative attention. Safer to keep it where it is going to be well recieved.

Even Niche films have the potential to explode into 'main stream' such as "What the Bleep Do We Know" which recieved little to no attention prior to showing, or even immediatley after. Once it caught on word of mouth, then some main stream channels picked up on it and had a talk show or two about it.

That was again ...

"What the Bleep Do We Know" - the movie can be rented at any major movie place. Great movie about applicable meanings of Quantum Pyshics and its relation to 'eastern' (using the word losely) spiritual sciences.