Rollingstone refuses to run ad for Bible - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-20-2005, 02:56 PM   #31
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America
Oh so now the Republicans own the Bible.
How did you get this conclusion?
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 02:57 PM   #32
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by cardosino


It is an ad for God in the same way that my DVR's instruction manual is an ad for Pioneer Electronics.
Actually that's a pretty weak analogy. When you have the DVR instuction book that means you already pocess the DVR. That's not necessarily the case with the Bible. Many have read the Bible for years and still don't even know God.
__________________

__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 03:00 PM   #33
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


How did you get this conclusion?
Um read the quote I was responding to;

Quote:
...I mean, I've NEVER seen anything even remotely pro-conservative or pro-republican in this magazine.
Sounds like this person is assuming the only people who read or know the Bible are Republicans, and they couldn't be anymore wrong.

Now if you read it some other way I'd like to hear your interpretation of his statement.
__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 03:05 PM   #34
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: OC
Posts: 711
Local Time: 12:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America


Actually that's a pretty weak analogy. When you have the DVR instuction book that means you already pocess the DVR. That's not necessarily the case with the Bible. Many have read the Bible for years and still don't even know God.
Not really.

We're talking about the publication in question is considered an "ad" for that product., not whether that publication helps you to better understand the topic.

The bible is the word of God, it is not an ad for God.

Perhaps a biography, is a better analogy. Lee Kuan Yew's memoirs (which I just read, hence fresh in my mind) are not an ad for the Singapore Tourist Board, they are just a collection of facts, recollections, thoughts, etc.
__________________
cardosino is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 03:06 PM   #35
Blue Crack Addict
 
beli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In a frock in Western Australia
Posts: 15,464
Local Time: 08:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America


Um read the quote I was responding to;



Sounds like this person is assuming the only people who read or know the Bible are Republicans, and they couldn't be anymore wrong.

Now if you read it some other way I'd like to hear your interpretation of his statement.
Actually, that quote reads like the person is assuming only people who read or know the Bible are republicans which is a completely bizarre statement as most monarchies are church based.

But I'm guessing that was a typo and the person was actually referring to the USA political party........ which still doesn't make sense.
__________________
beli is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 03:09 PM   #36
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America
Sounds like this person is assuming the only people who read or know the Bible are Republicans, and they couldn't be anymore wrong.

Now if you read it some other way I'd like to hear your interpretation of his statement.
Actually, the statement suggests that Rolling Stone rejects things that are "conservative" and that, in the mind of Rolling Stone, the Bible is one of those "conservative things" (i.e., considered bad).

It was a poor snipe painting RS as a left-leaning publication.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 03:43 PM   #37
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Actually, the statement suggests that Rolling Stone rejects things that are "conservative" and that, in the mind of Rolling Stone, the Bible is one of those "conservative things" (i.e., considered bad).

It was a poor snipe painting RS as a left-leaning publication.
Well I've seen RS do pieces on religious oriented subjects and didn't have the anti-Christian bias expected by the person who made the statement.

It was a very poor snipe.
__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 03:51 PM   #38
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by cardosino



I think 2nd hand smoke kills a lot more people than second hand bibles do.......


american indians survived tobacco

much better
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 04:35 PM   #39
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 12:59 AM
I stopped getting RS myself eons ago. The only time I fool with it these days is if there is an article about U2 in it. Otherwise it can get fd.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 05:10 PM   #40
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,600
Local Time: 10:59 AM
So basically the problem is that Rolling Stone magazine is insufficiently rightwing. Well what did you expect?

How long till the burnings begin?
__________________
Kieran McConville is online now  
Old 01-20-2005, 05:31 PM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 08:59 PM
I've never burned a mag in my life, but I've thrown plenty away when I realized they have no value to me anymore.

I honestly think this is good publicity for the publishers of this reformed bible. Sure, I bet they were a little upset that RS first screwed them over, but if this generates plenty of press, they will sell more. Then I would think that they wouldn't be too let down after that.

Oh well, overall it just goes to show me once again that RS wants nothing to do with God, even if it's a measly ad that they would get paid for putting in their magazine. As a consumer, I'll be sure to keep this story in mind.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 06:04 PM   #42
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,286
Local Time: 07:59 PM
Good. There are certain things that don't need to be advertised because everyone alive already knows about them. Coke(a-Cola, thank you very much). Gasoline. Condoms. The Bible. Anyone that needs an advertisement to remind them about the bible isn't going to buy the bible anyway, so the advertisement would be utterly pointless.

I don't subscribe to RS, I never have, even when it was a great magazine, but if I did I wouldn't want to see an advertisement for this. I don't need a Bible company telling me where the 'truth' is and what makes 'sense' or not. I don't go in their house and tell them what to believe.
__________________
namkcuR is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 06:14 PM   #43
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by namkcuR
Good. There are certain things that don't need to be advertised because everyone alive already knows about them. Coke(a-Cola, thank you very much). Gasoline. Condoms. The Bible. Anyone that needs an advertisement to remind them about the bible isn't going to buy the bible anyway, so the advertisement would be utterly pointless.

I don't subscribe to RS, I never have, even when it was a great magazine, but if I did I wouldn't want to see an advertisement for this. I don't need a Bible company telling me where the 'truth' is and what makes 'sense' or not. I don't go in their house and tell them what to believe.
Zondervan isn't selling theology. They are selling a different translation. If you didn't read the ad, you may think that the KJV is the only version (or whatever gets put in hotels by the Gideons).

If the ad was pointless, Zondervan wouldn't spend the money.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 06:15 PM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 08:59 PM
Just to bring another point up, why do you think McDonald's advertises? We all know they're out there, but why do you think they advertise? Maybe, to continue to excite customers (esp kids), remind the public of the brand, and to create awareness, especially on a new product.

This newly interpreted bible is a new product. The bible has been available to the general public in English for hundreds of years, but this new version happens to be a new product. I'm sure the publishers chose Rolling Stone magazine as one of their allies in order to reach out to a secular audience, and within that audience, it might possibly have people who are curious about God, and need a smidgen of a reminder to check out a bible. They are simply (in this case, attempting of) putting their message out not for the sake of cash from Christian consumers, but for those who could most use what they have to offer.

If you don't like it, wonderful. It's just like me seeing an ad for condoms, tampons, viagra, whatever it is. I see no use in these things, but they aren't going to make me throw a pissy fit.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 10:10 PM   #45
War Child
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 965
Local Time: 12:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Do Miss America


Oh so now the Republicans own the Bible.
Yeah. That's what I said isn't it.

Cram a few more words down my throat won't you - there's a bit of room left in there...
__________________

__________________
Zoocoustic is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com