Jim & Tammy Faye one generation later

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Turok, Dec 14, 2006.

  1. Turok

    Turok

    http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/12/13/bakker.brown.commentary/index.html


    While I have no issue or argument with Jay's right to have his own version of Christianity, and in fact find his stated version to be more benign and less insulting than many other versions, it's clear that his is NOT the biblical version of Christianity.

    I concur with this comment posted on the above link...

    >Tim Shank, Pemberville, Ohio
    >I would like to know if the writers of this article ever sat
    >down and read the Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of
    >Mark, the Gospel of Luke, and the Gospel of John from
    >the first verse of Chapter 1 to the last verse of each book?
    >It is quite clear the writers are erroneous in their
    >understanding of Jesus birth, life, and death, and the
    >purpose for which He came.

    JB
     
  2. Turok

    Turok

  3. That is just your opinion. And it is quite clear that your opinion is inconsistent with the Bible. Who said that you're the final authority on what the biblical version of christianity is?

    I know it is not what the Christian right stands for.
     
  4. BTW, I don't believe the sincerety of either the father or the son. They're just out to make a buck. And it's much easier making a buck from poor Christians than from the market.
     
  5. Turok

    Turok

    JB3:
    >That is just your opinion.

    Oh great...another Wuffo who doesn't really know what the bible says.

    (and no, I'm not reading it for you...go do it yourself, starting with the books listed in the comments and then moving on to Revelations)

    JB3
    >Who said that you're the final authority on
    >what the biblical version of christianity is?

    That's right... who said?

    JB3
    >And it is quite clear that your opinion is inconsistent
    >with the Bible.

    Who said that you're the final authority on what the biblical version of christianity is?

    WTF, if you're gonna say I don't have the standing to state my opinion, don't state yours -- hypocritical ASS.

    JB
     
  6. i saw the piece on jay baker on the sundance chanel this evening. he seemed truly sincere and a cool person.

    imho--everyone should really check this show out--atheist, theist alike---very enjoyable.

    no doubt christ would have been more like jay baker than the falwell/bush types.

    regards,

    surfer
     
  7. Turok

    Turok

    I doubt he'll give me a reason to change my seriously agnostic ways, but on the surface (which is likely all I'll ever know of him) he seems like a real and likable guy rather than the hypocritical type.

    JB

     
  8. Why are you so jumpy? You state your opinion, and should be prepared to hear feedbacks.

    I'm not trying to stop you from stating your opinion. I'm just pointing out the inconsistencies in your opinion. Somehow that makes you mad and try to stop me from expressing my opinion.
     
  9. Turok

    Turok

    JB3
    >Why are you so jumpy?

    If pointing out hypocrisy as it arrives is the definition of "jumpy"...I plead guilty.

    >You state your opinion, and should be
    >prepared to hear feedbacks.

    I am perfectly prepared to hear feedback. I'm also prepared to call a hypocritical spade a hypocritical spade. Get used to it.

    >I'm not trying to stop you from stating your
    >opinion.

    Of course not, you're just saying that I have no standing upon which to voice it (the "who said you're the final authority" part) while saying that you do -- and that's where the definition of hypocrisy comes in.

    >I'm just pointing out the inconsistencies
    >in your opinion.

    No your not. You've not pointed out a single inconsistency ... you've only stated that you believe they exist. If you can't see the difference between those two, I can't help you. If you simply won't acknowledge the difference, you're just a plain old liar.

    >Somehow that makes you mad and try
    >to stop me from expressing my opinion.

    You really should get a grip ... please show me where I "tried to stop you from expressing your opinion". Keep expressing, by all means. I'll just continue to demonstrate your hypocrisy and penchant for writing things that aren't true.

    >Now who is the hypocritical A?

    Oh, that's a softball...

    A: I believe that we both have equal standing to voice.

    B: You claim that my opinion has no standing while voicing yours loudly.

    Since there's not a single hint of hypocrisy in "A" and "B" drips of it, the answer by definition, is you.

    Any more questions?

    JB
     
  10. I thought it was obvious but evidently it wasn't obvious to you. I'll explain it to you, slowwwwly.

    You made the claim that Bakker son's version of Christianity was not the biblical version, then quoted (and concurred with) this,
    >I would like to know if the writers of this article ever sat
    >down and read the Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of
    >Mark, the Gospel of Luke, and the Gospel of John from
    >the first verse of Chapter 1 to the last verse of each book?

    The implied message was that if one has not read the entire Bible, "from the first verse of Chapter 1 to the last verse of each book," then one does not have a standing to say what Christianity is.

    But by the same logic, you don't have a say here too - I don't believe that you've read the Bible, "from the first verse of Chapter 1 to the last verse of each book," judging from your posts. In other words, I wasn't saying that you don't have standing. You were saying that.
     
    #10     Dec 15, 2006