Carborendum

Members
  • Posts

    4567
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    200

Posts posted by Carborendum

  1. 1 hour ago, mrmarklin said:

    But if we want to be truly a World Wide Church, maybe a training program would be in order to get people ready.

    What do you think the missionary program is about?  I'll give you a hint: Missionaries rarely are the reason why people convert.

  2. 20 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

    Elder Kearon is just another upper middle class White guy, that only can ever partially understand the problems of the majority of Saints who live outside the US.

    Is there no one else ready????.

    So, Elder Kearon is incapable of understanding problems of people different than he is, just because he's an upper middle class white guy?  How did you come to that conclusion?

    Do you even know anything about him other than his intersectionality creds?  Prejudiced much?

  3. 40 minutes ago, zil2 said:

    v2: This wording is really interesting.  Perhaps it just means that because the tribes of Israel are scattered, Isaiah can't speak all things related to them without also speaking to the Gentiles - or perhaps it's just because the gospel would be restored through the Gentiles.  Anywho, it seems like interesting phrasing.

    Here's the breakdown.

    • Isaiah addressed ALL things concerning (ALL) the House of Israel.
    • We (modern day) are of the House of Israel.
    • Therefore, the things concerning us are also addressed in the words of Isaiah.

    I don't believe that this means ALL the words of Isaiah can be applied to All of Israel (both ancient and modern).  But it sure seems like a LOT of it can be applied to both generations.  And that stands to reason since all the things that happened to Ancient Israel are just historical realities of the cycle of empires.

  4. 21 hours ago, zil2 said:

    v38-39: Interesting that they were allowed to see him descend but not ascend.

    There is an interesting phenomenon here that many think is only symbolism.  But I believe it to be a real phenomenon.

    The "cloud" has been mentioned in the Bible many times as representing the "presence of God". (Ex 13:21; Num 9:15; Deut 1:33; 1 Ki 8:10; Isa 4:5; Eze 10:4; Matt 17:5; Mar 9:7; Luk 9:34; Rev 10:1 -- dozens more).

    Some instances in scriptures are clearly symbolic.  But as some of these verses clearly indicate, it was more than just a symbol.  Quite often, when a "cloud" came down, it was because the presence of Jehovah was truly there.

    I tend to believe that this wasn't like a cloud that we are thinking of.  It was "something" that obscured vision (e.g. something "clouds" our judgment).  But growing up with a professional photographer, I recognized that light can do some funny things.  If a light is too bright, it can obscure what it at the center, just as much as something which blocks light.  Bright light doesn't block, it overpowers.

    I believe the "theophanic cloud" mentioned in scriptures was a divine analog of this light effect.

    They were allowed to see Him descend because it was a second "condescension" for the lost sheep on the Wester continent.  He didn't expose His full glory.  But after He instituted the ordinances of the new dispensation to the Nephites, they were properly prepared to "look upon the face of God and live."  It was then that they were allowed to be present when Christ displayed His full glory to man.

    Those further away could not see, essentially because of light effects.  But the 12 were right next to him.  And let's say they received the second comforter.  They could endure.  Because of their proximity, the light differential would have been different.

    I'm not saying this is theologically accurate.  I'm just trying my best to explain something inexplicable with terms we are familiar with.

  5. On 12/11/2023 at 10:15 AM, prisonchaplain said:

    Big picture thought: Do we lament lost Hollywood, circle the wagons, and spend our time watching B-grade religious movies. OR do we engage the culture by producing and consuming the high-quality stuff? Of course, the actual answer is some of both. The first impulse is most common among Fundamentalists while Evangelicals favor the latter approach. Yet, even in those camps you'll find a mix. There is a lot of dross in Hollywood. Sadly, a good amount of Christian production is of poor quality. Love those gems that are both well done and faith affirming.

    I'm not sure I can really commiserate on the topic.  When I was a child, I was a product of a culture that let TV raise the children.  I really wasn't a good kid.  I had to do a lot of growing up after I left home.

    While I have to admit that it was all very entertaining, I really can't enumerate the benefit beyond escapism.  There are a few times when we have absolute gems (The Princess Bride, Secondhand Lions) that somehow speak to the classic archetypes.  But by and large, are they really something to miss?

    And I mean that as a sincere question.  Is there something to miss?  If so, what is it?

  6. 11 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

    IMHO Angel Studios is attempting to make faith affirming movies that are interesting enough that non-believers will watch. There are a couple of movies that come to mind (one Catholic, one Jewish) that were R-rated, yet definitely affirmed faith and had well-recognized production value. Movies about real life events can sometimes work well. Sound of Freedom (I haven't seen it) had potential, though it became politicized, then key players ran into controversy. These movies are few and far between, but they happen.

    Some faith-affirming movies flop miserable. All the Left Behind movies failed at the box office. I've seen them all. The Kirk Cameron ones (1990s) were okay for Evangelicals but had weak production value. The two re-dos tried and failed to reach the broader public. The blind was a sweet movie about the Duck Dynasty family but felt like something that would quickly go to streaming. 

    All this to say, it can work, but this is tough work and there is a lot of competition. Nevertheless, it may be worthwhile. 

    I've become interested in Kevin Sorbo's movies recently.  They're all indies.  So, low production types. 

    I kinda think some of them would be ok if the production value was higher.  But there have been a few that were pretty good even with low budgets (e.g. The Santa Suit).  I can think of a few others (with or without Sorbo) that had a decent message.  The thing that weakened them was that they were a bit predictable and a little contrived.

    Cameron's Fireproof did pretty well in theaters.  And it was decent.  But there were just a few things that made it lower quality.  And TBH, Cameron isn't the best actor for a lot of these films.

    I don't see why we can't have decent actors that are right for the part with a decent story that can be inspiring and have a fresh take.  None of that takes a huge budget.

  7. 27 minutes ago, Vort said:

    I didn't grow up in the East of the US, so a lot of this "melting pot/immigrant" stuff that I have heard about and seen portrayed on the screen is not a part of my own experience. I can imagine people of my generation saying something about "the Mexican lady down the street", but in that case it would probably be in reference to an actual Mexican woman, someone literally from Mexico rather than just of Mexican descent.

    Yeah, I know what you mean.  I'm the Korean guy in the ward.  And wouldn't you know it?  I've got 100% Korean blood.  And I'm an immigrant.  But for some reason people are worried about calling me "the Korean guy." What do you want to call me, "the slightly shorter guy with black hair and almond eyes"?  Then it's worse because I'm an engineer.

    Sheesh!  If you don't know my name, just call me the Korean guy.  That's what I am.

  8. 57 minutes ago, Vort said:

    I wish I had heard of this earlier.  Just yesterday, we had a stake Christmas Concert.  It departed from tradition in that the chapel was treated as an auditorium rather than a chapel.  So, we were allowed to clap after each piece.  And we used instruments and music styles that we normally would not use in a chapel.

    This would have been a rendition that I'd have suggested to the director.

  9. 13 hours ago, Vort said:

    The American equivalent is "Herbert Hoover", that hit the scene in 1929. Not very popular, though performed better than expected given the circumstances. "Herbert Hoover" did not suck nearly as much as popular media of the time claimed. Replaced by FuDaR, easily the most overrated American appliance of the 20th century. Someone should carve "Overrated" into the side of a mountain.

    Wrong one.

  10. 23 hours ago, Vort said:

    Lest any cry out at the ignorance of attributing plains to the Judean landscape as a uniquely American display of ignorance...

    Party-pooper!   Yes, that's right,  I called you a party pooper.

    23 hours ago, zil2 said:

    To those people, I say, "Go back to your humbug while the rest of us sing a beautiful hymn!"

    The area known anciently as "Judea" vs the current metropolitan area of the City of Judea today are two different things.

    Anciently, Judea was simply "the land of the Jews."  This would include the plains of modern-day Israel.  And since Jesus was born in ancient times...

    So, there you go, Mr. Poopie-pants. 

  11. 50 minutes ago, pam said:

    Absolutely no desire to see any of them.

    Meh, no accounting for taste.

    One thing I'll concede is that unless you're "into" the world of D&D, there were a lot of inside jokes or memes that you simply wouldn't recognize.  There was a whole bit about the Paladin walking over the rock.  It was a huge inside joke that the uninitiated simply wouldn't get.  People in the theaters were half laughing their hearts out.  While the other half were looking around wondering what was so funny.

    I liked Maverick because it was the first just pure adrenaline rush movie I've seen in a long time. 

    And Endgame... well, it was the end.  Sunk cost.  But it didn't disappoint.

  12. 1 hour ago, Jamie123 said:

    In Dune, the still-suit reclaimed all bodily excretions and recovered the water in drinkable form (which the wearer could sip from a tube around the neck). I've often wondered how that would work, and if anyone will ever invent such a thing.

    And in Waterworld the main character pumped his urine through a filter and drank the "clean" water afterward.  What made this scene completely gratuitous is that he was able to drink sea water.  He was a mutant.

    Regardless, I'd like to have that filter/pump.  And a Life Straw just doesn't work.

  13. 20 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

    I have no idea why this was posted or how it ties into what's being discussed....but... boy howdy was the nostalgia in watching in fun. :D

    This song was written by Michael McLean.

    I have no idea what his latest work has been.  And I am unaware of any recent controversy or whatever.  But I really liked that song he wrote.

  14. 1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

    Now I've had many rich people tell me "that's not what it means".   Folks say something like "Some have believed that the phrase eye of the needle refers to the name of a small gate into a city through which camels had to kneel to enter."

    It is what it means.  The "small gate" called the eye of the needle didn't exist at the time of Christ.

    1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

    I've met an awful lot of rich folks who take one of those, and say "oh good.  Prayer and/or humility, like a camel kneeling.  Got it."  Then they go about their lives happy in their wealth. 

    Yes, some rich people will say "oh we only need to..." then don't actually do that.

    No, the issue is two fold. 

    • The interpretation is usually wrong. 
    • Even with the right interpretation, people don't actually abide by the counsel the Savior was trying to convey.