Bott '14

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I think you are watching a different portion of the tape. Anyway, I watched it a few more times giving some more benefit of doubt, I an more convinced now then ever. The dream story is made up. I watched starting from 50:00, he says this at 50:30 that after he lost 800,000 he was talked to as a dog, meaning people who went through the 800,000 loss with him had issues. They then took these issues out on Brother Arnold. They put him on blast. He also mentions where he was railroaded, which means they really put the boots to him. Yet, before he goes into all this he says he isn't a virgin voice, he has fallen into this mudpuddle before. He says that he doesn't hold anything against these people 50:32. His whole talk up to the dream sequence is concerning bitterness from how he was treated. After he tells us the dream, he then talks about pacing the floor, he calls three women "bimbos" who who gave him a custom made shredding in front of family and friends. When he goes into the dream (actually multiple "dreams" plural, because he says night after night) he says that he was in Humbolt Texas, this isn't a dream, this is a reoccurring dream, which he has the head guy on his knees, (at this point its noticeable 50:48-50) he then states he had the 357 at the man's head (he raises his tone slightly) and reminds the congregation "in the dream!" with emphasis. Did everyone forget that he was relaying that he had recurring dreams? Yet, one should keep in mind he goes back to saying in the dream (hence "in my dream" and 357 to his head, "in the dream.") in a rare situation where you are having a recurring dreams they are called recurring because they are identical, or of the same theme. Yet, we are led to believe that this one particular story is the "recurring dream sequence."

He then says to the kneeling victim, listen here you dirt bag, you are lower than whale poop in the ocean 51:00, at this point he pauses, I guess he doesn't normally say lower than whale poop in the ocean? 51:00 to 51:30 he says what he wanted the victim to do, how to do it, to deliver Brother Arnold from these false accusations, by 51:30 he tells us these dreams were recurring. I never had an opinion concerning this, prior to PO posting the video. In Malcolm Gladwell's book Blink in the introduction is a story concerning the J. Paul Getty Museum in California and kouros-a sculpture being sold to them for just under $10 million dollars.

The Getty moved cautiously. It took the kouros on loan and began a thorough investigation. Was the statue consistent with other known kouroi? The answer appeared to be yes. The style of the sculpture seemed reminiscent of the Anavyssos kouros in the National Archaeological Museum
of Athens, meaning that it seemed to fit with a particular time and place. Where and when had the statue been found? No one knew precisely, but Becchina gave the Getty’s legal department
a sheaf of documents relating to its more recent history. The kouros, the records stated, had been in the private collection of a Swiss physician named Lauffenberger since the 1930s, and he in turn had acquired it from a well-known Greek art dealer named Roussos. A geologist from the University of California named Stanley Margolis came to the museum and
spent two days examining the surface of the statue with a high-resolution stereomicroscope. He then removed a core sample measuring one centimeter in diameter and two centimeters in length from just below the right knee and analyzed it using an electron microscope, electron microprobe, mass spectrometry, X-ray diffraction, and X-ray fluorescence. The statue was made
of dolomite marble from the ancient Cape Vathy quarry on the island of Thasos, Margolis concluded, and the surface of the statue was covered in a thin layer of calcite-which was significant, Margolis told the Getty, because dolomite can turn into calcite only over the course
of hundreds, if not thousands, of years. In other words, the statue was old. It wasn’t some contemporary fake.
The Getty was satisfied. Fourteen months after their investigation of the kouros began, they agreed to buy the statue. In the fall of 1986, it went on display for the first time. The New York Times marked the occasion with a front-page story. A few months later, the Getty’s curator of
antiquities, Marion True, wrote a long, glowing account of the museum’s acquisition for the art journal The Burlington Magazine. “Now standing erect without external support, his closed hands fixed firmly to his thighs, the kouros expresses the confident vitality that is characteristic
of the best of his brothers.” True concluded triumphantly, “God or man, he embodies all the radiant energy of the adolescence of western art.”
The kouros, however, had a problem. It didn’t look right. The first to point this out was an Italian art historian named Federico Zeri, who served on the Getty’s board of trustees. When Zeri was taken down to the museum’s restoration studio to see the kouros in December of 1983, he
found himself staring at the sculpture’s fingernails. In a way he couldn’t immediately articulate, they seemed wrong to him. Evelyn Harrison was next. She was one of the world’s foremost experts on Greek sculpture, and she was in Los Angeles visiting the Getty just before the
museum finalized the deal with Becchina. “Arthur Houghton, who was then the curator, took us down to see it,” Harrison remembers. “He just swished a cloth off the top of it and said, ‘Well, it isn’t ours yet, but it will be in a couple of weeks.’ And I said, ‘I’m sorry to hear that.’” What did Harrison see? She didn’t know. In that very first moment, when Houghton swished off the cloth,
all Harrison had was a hunch, an instinctive sense that something was amiss. A few months later, Houghton took Thomas Hoving, the former director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in
New York, down to the Getty’s conservation studio to see the statue as well. Hoving always makes a note of the first word that goes through his head when he sees something new, and he’ll never forget what that word was when he first saw the kouros. “It was ‘fresh’- ‘fresh,’” Hoving recalls. And “fresh” was not the right reaction to have to a two thousand-year-old
statue.

Hoving turned to Houghton. “Have you paid for this?”

Houghton, Hoving remembers, looked stunned.

“If you have, try to get your money back,” Hoving said. “If you haven’t, don’t.”

The Getty was getting worried, so they convened a special symposium on the kouros in Greece.

They wrapped the statue up, shipped it to Athens, and invited the country’s most senior sculpture experts. This time the chorus of dismay was even louder.

Harrison, at one point, was standing next to a man named George Despinis, the head of the Acropolis Museum in Athens. He took one look at the kouros and blanched. “Anyone who has ever seen a sculpture coming out of the ground,” he said to her, “could tell that that thing has never been in the ground.” Georgios Dontas, head of the Archeological Society in Athens, saw the statue and immediately felt cold. “When I saw the kouros for the first time,” he said, “I felt as though there was a glass between me and the work.” Dontas was followed in the symposium by Angelos Delivorrias, director of the Benaki Museum in Athens. He spoke at length on the contradiction between the style of the sculpture and the fact that the marble from which it was carved came from Thasos. Then he got to the point. Why did he think it was a fake? Because when he first laid eyes on it, he said, he felt a wave of “intuitive repulsion.” By the time the symposium was over, the consensus among many of the attendees appeared to be that the kouros was not at all what it was supposed to be. The Getty, with its lawyers and scientists and months of painstaking investigation, had come to one conclusion, and some of the world’s foremost experts in Greek sculpture-just by looking at the statue and sensing their own “intuitive repulsion”-had come to another. Who was right?


Well, you need to get the book on linehttp://www.lequydonhanoi.edu.vn/uplo...20Thinking.pdf

To find out the rest, but what I'am getting at is at first blink, when we are watching or listening, or reading a post. We get a first intuitive response of right or wrong. We lose this through agendas. Either right or wrong. Brother Arnold like I have said before has preached some awesome messages, you who have even heard the one I'm speaking about here have loved it, and gleaned some diamonds. Bravo. Brother N David saw something, he relayed it to us as weird. I highly respect him, and therefore I took a look and listen and not saying I saw the same thing. Because I don't want to place words in his mouth. But I saw something "weird" which now I'm convinced that what I saw was what I originally thought. I mean nothing to Brother Arnold, and matter nothing to him or his ministry. He will live out his life unscathed from my "opinion." of the critique of this lone vid. We need to follow that first indicator, and consider it. That's all. May Brother Arnold live long and prosper, I hope he found his 800,000 and if he didn't may the Lord deal with that as well.

PO, if you didn't see anything, then no foul on your part. I'll give place. The Lord Jesus richly bless you. May we continue to be forum friends.

Thou much learning has made thee mad. LOL!

Certainly we will be forum friends.