A site that has movies, tv shows, and tons other stuff … http://www.alluc.org/alluc/
Category: Entertainment Page 3 of 4
Here’s a link to a Star-Telegram article about Ernie and Zach (Zach is in my D-team @ CCBC) appearing on Oprah today … http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/16587162.htm
Okay, not a huge sports fan in general, and usually basketball is at the bottom of my list of the sports I do get involved in. But this is really quite amazing. The Mavs have never done well my whole life and now they’re tearing it up in the finals. That’s pretty sweet. Man I hope they can keep this up …
And this guy is a mad-man when he plays!
If you’re going to see it tonight, just know that the historical “facts” claimed in the movie are mostly false. Brown mixes enough truth with lies to make his historical assessment of Christianity seem true, but it is indeed false, false beyond measure. He is no historian, and he is no scholar by any means. And yet he claims the history within his book is true. He has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about on so many points. For example, it is asserted in the story that the idea of Christ being God was first introduced in the 4th century at the Council of Nicea. In the book it states,
“‘Jesus’ establishment as ‘the Son of God’ was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicaea.’” (p. 233)
Absolutely False. The idea of Christ being God is clearly shown in the Gospel’s, in Paul’s letters, and other letters of the NT, written shortly (a few decades) after Christ’s death and resurrection. Even atheistic scholars agree on this!
Just take the whole movie as fiction, and enjoy it for what it is: a decent fictional conspiratorial movie that isn’t in any way based on the reality of the history of Christianity.
I have heard this response from many people I know and I’d like to explain what’s wrong with it. Yes, it’s fiction. But Dan Brown himself has come out publicly and said that within the story, he intends to challenge the historical account of Christ as well as that of Scripture itself by asking, “How do we know any of the things said of Christ are true?” Hmm, that’s a big problem to me, and it’s coming from the author himself. And what a better way to do that in the form of fictional, conspiratorial entertainment that captivates the average American. He has found quite a platform to launch his real agenda.
The story itself is fiction, it never happened, yes. Any “in-your-face” unbeliever must admit that, if they know anything concerning Christianity. It’s really an intriguing story and from what I’ve heard a real page turner. But what Dan Brown does within the fictional story is raises the question, “How can we possibly know if Scripture is breathed out by God, and if that’s the case, how do we know if anything is historically correct about who Christ actually was? If there are 80 other gospels that were written back in the early church, but only 4 were accepted in the canon of Scripture, how can we know if those gospels are accurate in any manner?” One of the big problems is that Dan Brown knows more historical information concerning the early church than most people, and specifically more than most Christians (though he’s dead wrong on about half of it, and it can be proven). He then takes that information and twists it with absolute historical lies in an attempt to paint a picture of the early church that is dead wrong.
The danger of this book is not that people will believe the fictional story actually happened (those who do are missing his main point any way), but rather the danger is that Brown raises questions about the truthfulness of Christianity altogether, and he knows the average American Christian cannot answer the questions that unbelievers will now be raising (which sadly, in my personal estimation, is true). The positive aspect about these questions being raised is that I believe it will separate out those who are the faithful of Christ from those who are frauds. It will separate the sheep from the goats, basically, because much of modern day Christianity has been blurred with the ways of the world because of the passive, watered-down, culture-friendly preaching by pastors within much of the church. We must return to and know how to defend the 5-Solas of the Reformation: Salvation is by Grace Alone, through Faith Alone, in Christ Alone, infallibly revealed in Scripture Alone, all for the Glory of God Alone.
Persecution is good for the church, mainly because it purifies her and makes her holy, sets her apart from the world and it’s ways, and exposes those who do not truly believe within the church, that they may be shown for what they are. Could it shake the faith of some unestablished believer’s? Sure it could. But it will challenge them to know why they believe what they believe, and thus get them established in their faith, that they may know that the roots of their salvation are in God alone and His Son’s work on the cross to bring them back to life from spiritual death … And that they may know that God has revealed Himself through the Scriptures alone and that what has been canonized as Scripture has been breathed out by God Himself through the pens of His people.
When I first heard about this, I thought, “You’ve gotta be kidding me!?” But this is for real. Samuel L. Jackson, a world renown movie star in such movies as Pulp Fiction amongst many others, is now starring in what is to be one of the most ridiculous films of the year. “What is it about,” you ask? Well, snakes on a plane. And Samuel L. Jackson is gonna kick some snake tail.
Apparently, in some mishap, poisonous snakes stowed away on an airliner somehow get loose and start killing people and pets with their venomous fangs. But Samuel L. Jackson (aka “Nelville Flynn”) just so happens to be on the plane and is there to save the day from the wrath of the killer snakes. According to IMDB, the producers apparently wanted to change the name of the movie to Flight 121, but Samuel L. Jackson was adamant they not change it from the original name. So needless to say, the name stayed. Who’s going to argue with Samuel L. Jackson?
I mean really man! Why are you doing this to your career, Mr. Jackson? I’m just confused. The plot is terrible! At best, this will be a movie you watch on UPN while taking a nap on Saturday afternoon around 4, drifting in and out of consciousness. I just can’t believe this. I might actually just go see it because it looks so ridiculous. Maybe that’s their point though … maybe it’s a giant marketing scheme to get people in the theater. Well, regardless, isn’t SLJ shooting himself in the foot with this one? Oh well … looks pretty funny actually. Maybe it’s a comedy, made to look serious? I don’t know, I could be wrong …