03 May 13
Genesis 3:15
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”
Deuteronomy 18:15
The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him.
Romans 4:3
What does Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
04 May 13
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieFirstly the points the authors are making are themselves meaningless in the context that neither they nor you are either willing or able to explain who "evangelicals" actually are. Without a fixed point of reference it is impossible to comment on whether or not there is some group of Christians who "hate Jesus".
It meaningless because it fails to address a single point the authors have made and provides not a single reason, can you not see that, not a single one, blank, meaningless, empty nothingness.
Secondly, the article is poorly written hyperbole. The title is "Why evangelicals hate Jesus" but in the article one of the co-authors states that these "evangelicals" don't actually "hate Jesus" after all.
Thirdly we have a co-written article (presumably one author couldn't manage the cognitive exercise on their own) which claims evangelicals "hate" then backs down from the word and we don't know who the evangelicals are or why he has generalized every one of this group into his focus of accusation.
I've stated several times, the article is a poorly (co) written self-contradictory insult making a sweeping generalisation about a non-specific group of Christians who are not art of the Jehovah's Witness cult.
As I said, I can see why you like it robbie.
04 May 13
Originally posted by RBHILLI remember being taught in school the Aztecs believed Cortez was a savior God from one of their legends. I wonder if something was passed down from Noah that they still remembered about a savior God to come just like all those flood myths or legends. If so, they were not warned about the anti-Christ was coming first, which Cortez and his men turned out to be for them.
They new of a coming savior.
04 May 13
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterIts not important to the arguments being proffered who the evangelics actually are, does it make any difference to the arguments if its pointed out that John MaCain is a republican and also an evangelical Christian or that the groups are essentially protestant denominations, no, its a nonsense to say that it has any relevance to the arguments being proffered because they are not dependent on who it is but what they are doing, to what extent and why. Similarly when one has a so called point of reference it tends to act like a hook for prejudices, he's a republican, he's a socialist and hey it provides a convenient point to hang ones prejudices upon. Does it matter that David Cameron is a Tory if he's writing a column on stamp collecting, hardly. So I reject the notion entirely of a so called point of reference, for its also irrelevant to the points being proffered which should be judged objectively and independently on their merits alone.
Firstly the points the authors are making are themselves meaningless in the context that neither they nor you are either willing or able to explain who "evangelicals" actually are. Without a fixed point of reference it is impossible to comment on whether or not there is some group of Christians who "hate Jesus".
Secondly, the article is poorly writte of the Jehovah's Witness cult.
As I said, I can see why you like it robbie.
Whether the article is poorly written is an irrelevancy to the points that it makes, those being that evangelical Christians have made a caricature of the Christ.
Whether i like it or not is also irrelevant to the points that the article was making, you may do better if you learn to actually address the points that are actually contained within the articles that are cited rather than those which are not and are irrelevant to that actual content.
I thank Ckeckbaiter and others who actually did acknowledge the content of the article and tried at very least to find some Biblical justification for the stance that evangelicals have taken, even Ronald Jonah My Behinds managed to do it, albeit it not very successfully. Perhaps you could too.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
04 May 13
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieCan you demonstrate exactly how specific evangelicals have "made a caricature of the Christ"?
...evangelical Christians have made a caricature of the Christ.
Edit please refer to reasoning and evidences in the article in the OP and not your opinions as you instructed me.
04 May 13
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterthe articles does not mention specific evangelicals, evangelism is a movement comprising of essentially protestant churches and I have demonstrated throughout this thread, with Biblical reference, why such a caricature as is alleged in the article has created a disparity which has not only superseded the Biblical Christ, but made him unrecognisable..
Ok can you demonstrate exactly how specific evangelicals have "made a caricature of Christ"?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
04 May 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHow can a "movement" make a caricature of the Christ without referring to specific examples or individuals?
the articles does not mention specific evangelicals, evangelism is a movement comprising of essentially protestant churches.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 116952
04 May 13
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNo you said above:
I can only substantiate claims made by the article, not those that are not, i will say it once again, the article does not mention specific evangelicals.
"Whether the article is poorly written is an irrelevancy to the points that it makes, those being that evangelical Christians have made a caricature of the Christ. "
Are you saying this is a claim made by the article or not?
04 May 13
Originally posted by divegeesterif you have anything to say with regard to the content of the article I will be pleased to discuss it, when you make a reference to the content, let me know.
No you said above:
[b]"Whether the article is poorly written is an irrelevancy to the points that it makes, those being that evangelical Christians have made a caricature of the Christ. "[b]
Are you saying this is a claim made by the article or not?