±«Óătv

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Latest news... Benny's hair was allowed into the UK.

Not sure why the following song just popped into my head



I can't explain it at all as it has no connection whatsoever with the theme of this thread.

It has, Benny was not allowed into the munchkin land either.

Hi petermorrow,

A different youtube popped into my head (flagged up by princessnewsjunkie some time ago, I believe):



But of course the beliefs of the christians posting here are nothing like that. Those are all very well thought through. Right?

Peter

"But of course the beliefs of the christians posting here are nothing like that. Those are all very well thought through. Right?"

Exactly! ;-)

Peter

Let me explain in more detail.

The main difference, in fact the critical difference, between Mr. Hinn's christianity and mine is the hair cut.

Hair is a critical issue for us Christians, and it's important to get it right. Generally speaking we're not allowed long hair, that's a bad witness (unless you're Samson, and I'm not). Short, sharp presentation, a bit like William's in the picture at the top, is what's needed; I mean you don't expect anyone with hair like Hinn's to get into heaven, do you?

Look, even the Veggietales know this, see clip from song number two here:



Us Christians, mad? Not at all. :-)

Some people might also like a read at this:

No long hair! But what about Benny's pout! Jordan would be proud of it !

Barmy British buerocracy gone mad !

#6 - PeterKlaver -

"But of course the beliefs of the christians posting here are nothing like that. Those are all very well thought through. Right?"

Correct.

And I hope that you are not insinuating that this load of ...[description destined for the moderator's bin]... from the video you posted is somehow an accurate example of all beliefs contrary to atheism.

As a Christian, I would like to put it on record that the doings and goings on of the Benny Hinn circus are truly worthy of the word "insane". I am particularly pleased that the Bible makes a clear distinction between true and false Christianity, and I most certainly file Mr Hinn's nonsense and sorcery in the "false" compartment.

I would like to think that non-believers could also acknowledge that there are such distinctions, and not tar all believers with the same brush, just as I am sure they would not like to be associated with their insane co-ideologues from the Gulag and elsewhere.

Petermorrow, thanks for the laughs provided in post 8. I like the haircut joke.:) And while I haven't finished the lengthier piece on Hinn yet, there was an ever much bigger laugh in the first part of that. At some point it cites someone from a christian watchdog organization saying about Hinn "It would also be nice if he would submit himself to a real theologian for examination." That's really a kicker isn't it. An examination of a preacher. Carried out by a theologian. A 'real' theologian no less! That was possibly the best laugh I had on what is here a very rainy Saturday evening. A bit like putting the KGB in charge of examining whether any people were ever sent off to the gulag camps in Siberia.

Well, Peter, you know, LSV has it pretty much summed up.

And if I might be serious for just one moment, I think you know that at least some of the Christians who post here are prepared to acknowledge the weird, and yes, sometimes sinister practices which pass for Christianity. I don't expect you to agree with me, but every once in a while it would make for a pleasant change if some of the atheists here acknowledged that we're not all saying the same thing.

Benny Hinn and his smash and grab Word of Faith theology, fly in and fly out!

Mr. Crawley:

I am taking the sides of the U.K. Immigration Authorities on the Benny Hinn story....


~Dennis Junior~

Hello petermorrow,

"I don't expect you to agree with me, but every once in a while it would make for a pleasant change if some of the atheists here acknowledged that we're not all saying the same thing."

Let me take issue with what you said there.

I do acknowledge that not all christians all equally nutty. You know perfectly well that I don't have the intellectual disdain for e.g. Bernards_insight or you that I have for the two pastors of this blog, the Whitewell horde, the occasional crazy Catholic here, the logically impaired, etc. I feel that your statement above is a matter of you being a little disingenuous in the service of your faith. Recently I did note specifically about you that I don't hold you to be on the same level as e.g. the WW horde

/blogs/ni/2009/06/megachurch_in_succession_turmo.html

"But why not provide some balance and show that for one Petermorrow we also have a large horde of evangelical christians for whom their christian faith is the perfect catalyst for unthinking and nastiness."

I beleive that Benny Hinn is a man of God who travels the world Healing and delivering people through the power of Jesus Christ, he is a true servant of God, It is written Jesus went about doing good,There are true miracles and peoples lives are changed. It is also written touch not Gods annoited and do his prophets no harm. Which one of theses good works do you stone him for. Those without sin cast the first stone!

Peter

Please accept my apologies. In responding I was thinking of your two comments on this thread, "But of course the beliefs of the christians posting here are nothing like that. Those are all very well thought through. Right?" and "It would also be nice if he would submit himself to a real theologian for examination." That's really a kicker isn't it." both of which I thought of, at the very least, as playful, indeed I read them as being a touch sarcastic.

It's one of the troubles of communication at a distance, I have to read into the words as well as read them, so I get things wrong at times.

On the other point of the WW thread, I had completely missed that comment, or forgotten about it, and do appreciate it, but I suppose all I'm saying is that sometimes the things of value in Christianity get lost because of the actions of the 'lunatic fringe', worse still, the 'lunatic fringe' isn't always limited to the fringe!

I hope this clears things up.


Ruth02

May I begin by responding to your last comment "Those without sin cast the first stone!", you raise an important point.

However, 'casting stones' and making careful common sense decisions about what is and what is not valid are two different things. At times we have to make decisions about what is and what is not good in Christianity, and there are all sorts of reasons why I question, seriously question, the validity of one Mr. Hinn. For a start, no one person in the Christian church should have that amount of power or control over so many people, and money and miracles aside, we have a 'personality cult' problem in the church. Frankly whether the man be a charismatic type like Hinn or a conservative Presbyterian he should never be allowed to be in the position where he is given such adulation, that alone is frightening.

Benny Hinn has carried out numerous conferences in UK for years and their have been no threats to human life. Unfortunately thousands of people who genuinely expect him will be disapointed. Despite whatever people may say about him, his presents in the UK is not a national threat. Therefore his refusal into the country reeks of religious persecution orchestrated by Left wing Fascists.

To my SISTER RUTH, just be careful about benny Hinn, and be careful about who the Lord's anointed IS.

Jesus is God's anointed NOT benny hinn.

To PeterKlaver, I certainly don't like the way you write your posts, if anyone has been nasty or condescending its you.

Also, your bigoty and hate sadly clearly shows in your words, I will pray for you that your heart will soften.

petermorrow, I agree w/ your point that it is at best concerning (or to use your words, "frightening") that one person such as Benny Hinn should have so much power and control. What is truly disturbing is he is most likely using that power and adoration to build his own little empire to the detriment of his followers.

Also of great concern is the fact that he has such a great number of followers, many of whom are willing to take his word that he has "healed" them from whatever ailment plagues them, and then stop the treatment that is keeping their disease under control. Unfortunately, PT Barnum was right--there's a sucker born every minute.

Hello people,

post 21 by rmw_co

Meet Rachel, my Flying Spaghetti Monster buddy. I met her through the Church of the FSM. That place used to be fabulous, the best online place for non-believers to hang out. Unfortunately, like here, pre-moderation was inserted some time ago, killing much of the fun.:( So it seemed a good idea to invite her to start posting on the blog here.

Welcome to the Will & Testament blog Rachel.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

On a more serious note.....Benny Hinn was in belfast in 2005 and attracted huge crowds at the Odyssey centre. I do remember listening to the report on Sunday Sequence.

I assume these new rules are in place since his last visit ? Also, I wonder how they will impact on the YECs such as Ken Ham and John McKay ? I'm sure they'll have got things sorted in time for their next visits though.

#20 johnthebap2,

"Also, your bigoty and hate sadly clearly shows in your words, I will pray for you that your heart will soften."

While I recognize that your intentions are good, I think you should recognize that praying for PeterKlaver's soul (and most likely, anybody else's) is an exercise in futility. If I may be so bold as do recommend doing something more constructive instead, like donating time and/or money to an organization that *really* helps people--think saving the rainforest or helping Afghan orphans. Really, donating $25 doesn't take much more effort than asking god for help.

It would have been easy for Hinn to get the necessary paperwork - there are hundreds of UK churches that would have signed whatever they were asked to to get him in for the event - immigration knows who he is and it's a moronic thing to have inconvenienced this many thousand people for a bureaucratic end. Thanks, government, yet again, for interfering.

By the way, what do you call Benny Hinn's haircut?

A Hinn-Do.

Petermorrow,

"I hope this clears things up."

Sure, no probs.:)

I find it interesting that most 'Christians' (from the 1000 or so variants) can easily recognise the falseness of Benny Hinn, but when it comes to identifying error in their own version of beliefs they are unable to do so.

Surely if you can see the error in Benny Hinn it should alert you to the possibility that, despite how intelligent you view yourself, you may have been duped as well with your own set of beliefs.

I think the greatest argument against Christianity is it's lack of unity. Given the schisms within Christianity each branch is different from the next. The differences may not be on the surface for all to see, but they are there all the same. In the area where I live there are Brethren, Baptists, Methodists, CoI, Presbyterians, Free Ps, Quakers, Catholics, Jehoviah Witnesses and others who attend unattached gospel halls. None of them agree with each other. They can all see faults in each other. Those of us looking on can only come to one of two conclusions. Either all Christians are deluded and there is no God, or true religion is either non-existent at the moment or being suppressed, possibly, by the very groups who claim to worship God. I find it impossible, therefore, to align myself to any of the various groups given the current 'state of play'.
I have never been an aethist due to my own personal faith-promoting experiences. But, if I were, I dont think, given the state of the 'body-Christian', that I would be attracted to it right now.
I suppose that

(Sorry, my machine has a mind of it's own sometimes)
What I omitted was,...I suppose that as long as individuals 'toe the denominational party line' nothing will change. I know those who are not happy about aspects of what they have been taught yet they are happy to go along with the norm - sit there and say nothing, thinking at least we are not part of, for example, those down the road.
I dont think there is anyone, if they are totally frank, who is happy about everything they are taught from their particular Christian group. Surely, we need a movement away from error and towards truth. Instead of identifying the speck in Benny's eye, we should be removing the moat out of our own.

puretruthseeker,

"I think the greatest argument against Christianity is it's lack of unity."

Some christians here would say that the best argument against christianity is christians. I'm not so sure of that, I see other things probably as stronger arguments against it. But there is some point to their idea. If I remember correctly, you arrived during the Whitewel episode, correct? I don't remember if you're from WW or PCN or neither. But maybe some of the things posted by the WWers/PCNers on those three threads might make you want to consider the idea that the christians are a very potent argument against christianity?

Explain the following to me;

"Given the schisms within Christianity each branch is different from the next"

[em]therefore[/em]

"Either all Christians are deluded and there is no God, or true religion is either non-existent at the moment or being suppressed"

I'm not sure I follow. All Christians are different, therefore Christ is not God?

Is that an argument?

Ref 32 PeterKlaver
Yes, I ‘arrived’ during the WW episode but I am not attached to them or PCN. In fact, I am not attached to any Christian Church. The reason I’m not attached to any of the Christian Churches is because I feel there is something missing from Christianity that I can’t quite put my finger on entirely. However, here are a few points in no particular order.
1. The structure, authority and doctrine of the Early Church does not seem to exist in any of the so-called Churches today.
2. The Bible is obviously not the full word of God. If it were it would be explicitly clear, cohesive and unambiguous – which it obviously isn’t. I’m sure an omnipotent God must be embarrassed that he is considered the ‘author’ of the bible.
3. I find it ridiculous that a section of Christians broke away from the main church (Catholic) claiming it was in error and with only the bible – with all the problems therein – as a guide, set up a new church (Protestant) with different doctrine.
4. The proliferation of other churches that broke away from the ‘new’ church adds weight to my last point. If the first church that was established after the ‘split’ was ‘true’, there would have been no need for other churches to be established with a different slant on what is right.
5. There is too little of what is considered as ‘God’s word’ that is emphasised and too much ignored. This is probably due to the fact that there is no one with a complete understanding of what it all means. Although the New Testament is full of instruction and commandments, modern Christians tend to play down such works as unnecessary claiming that they are ‘saved by faith through grace’ and that such ‘works’ are not important. Now, for me, I think that it is probably more important to treat others as I would prefer to be treated than to say in my head, ‘Jesus, enter my heart’. There isn’t an example of a potential ‘asking Jesus into my heart’ anywhere in the bible yet Christians think this is the way to avoid ‘hell’. It’s too much like abracadabra.
6. Most ‘christians’ that I know who have been ‘converted’ have been motivated by fear of punishment rather than the love of reward. The most popular conversion tool is the ‘alter call’ with it tacky pop psychology or the grubby little tract using rhetoric the unconverted are unaware off. Surely, an omnipotent God would have a better recruitment strategy?
7. The Christian idea of God’s judgement is flawed. I, as a simple individual, cannot see how it would be fair to consign billions of individuals to a punishment that lasts forever for something that they did over ‘70’ years. Also, given that the vast majority of the individuals who have dwelled on this planet have never heard of Jesus, how can they be ‘saved’? The Christian way leaves too many things unanswered.
8. I think that the ‘born-again’, ‘saved’, evangelical type of Christianity tends to attract more than it's fair share of the vulnerable, easily led, narrow-minded, mentally ill, social misfit and opportunistic types who desire to lead. I have nothing against those people except for the opportunists.
9. The ‘denominations’ tend to be ‘closed schools’ and are difficult to breach.
10. Generally, Christians do not act like Christians are supposed to.
So, I feel repelled by Christian churches, I feel their recruitment strategy is flawed and I see the lack of unity and shared understanding amongst Christians as an argument against Christianity.
I’m not an atheist as I do believe that there is a God. In fact, I know there is a God. However, the knowledge I have of God was gained by faith, sacrifice on my part and an intention to act on any confirmation. Such knowledge is not transferable to others. Nevertheless, it doesn’t stop me saying what I can testify to.


Ref 33 Bernard_Insight
What I am trying to say is, that as Christianity has splintered there has been increasing divergence rather than convergence. Or in other words, when a group break away from an established ‘Christian’ group, which in turn broke away from another established group and so on, because they thought they were more correct, rather than christianity getting closer to the truth it appears to be getting further away. The trend seems to be to continue to splinter and reform. This process has not yet appeared to have brought us closer to the truth. In fact, it has only resulted in more confusion. Therefore, as the bible states that God isn’t about confusion but about peace and harmony, then the so-called Christian churches, as a combination, don’t represent the God they claim to. So, as the Christian churches claim to represent God then either they are deluded, their version of God is not the true God and doesn’t really exist or some other group represent the true God.

It is my opinion that generally speaking, christians and christianity are the greatest advertisement against God. People such as Martin Luther, Pope Ratzinger of Nazi Youth fame, Benny Hinn, Ian Paisley, Jim McConnell and my very active Christian neighbour who thinks his cruelty can’t be detect through shared partition walls all have a lot to answer for according to them.

“I'm not sure I follow. All are different, therefore Christ is not God?” Im not sure I follow what you have written either. Your attempt to paraphrase me is inaccurate.

What im saying is, given the different ways that the various churches understand God, they cant all be right. If they all claim to be influenced by the Holy Ghost then why doesn’t the Holy Ghost sort out their structure and doctrine and align them with the will of God? I would argue that the Holy Ghost does not operate within the so-called Christian church.

The churches remind me of con artists who sell time-share accommodation that doesn’t exist. Maybe the actual salesperson honestly feels that the product exists or maybe they have their doubts but the rewards are so good they ignore their concerns. Sure, they have seen the accommodation or photographs of it, they have handled the professionally produced brochures, they work out of a fancy office and despite any reservations they may have, their greed or some other selfish motive ensures they continue producing converts ...sorry, sales.

In fact, that’s just it. The churches are selling heavenly time-share that they do not have the authority to do, but do it anyway as the salespersons have invested a lot of their time building up their own heavenly real estate portfolio – they want to believe it’s true too and maybe some will even lie to gain a greater ‘reward’(Luther thought it was ok). I think it strange that they never seem to question their authority. If I was a church leader I would be asking myself, ‘what gives me the right to promote my version of the Kingdom when the people in the church down the road have a different understanding? Or, ‘what gives me the right to claim that the Holy Ghost influences me when it’s quite obvious that the church next door is different from mine and their leader claims the inspiration from the Holt Ghost too’? How can this be?

Imagine if I deciding that I was going to offer accommodation for sale in one of the new constructions in Belfast. Surely, unless I had the authority from the owner to do so, I could be arrested and charged with some form of deceit. I find it preposterous that someone can just assume authority to administer in God’s kingdom and make things up as they go along. Things have to be more orderly than that. It’s not a little ‘banana republic’ that we are talking about; it’s supposed to be the greatest kingdom that ever existed.
So, I am convinced that those who call themselves Christian leaders are not ‘called’ of God at all and their churches are nothing to do with the kingdom of God.

puretruthseeker,

I am a atheist so I wouldn't go along with the last few lines of what you posted to me. But much of the rest of what you wrote to me makes excellent sense. Please hang around on the blog, if you like.:)

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

PTS

I can agree with some of what you say.

The thing is this - Christians should all agree on Soteriology - that it is by faith alone, and by Christ alone - that is the Gospel.
For me that is the line of division, all secondary matters ie Inerrancy, Escatology, gifts etc etc - can be debated without division needing to occur.

You yourself PTS have views that cause division - there must be a sure source that brings unity - and that source is God and his word.
It is those who interpret the word of God wronlgy, who bring confusion and division.

J-