"Oh my loooooooooooord....lord...lord...looooooord....."
They are actually both equally annoying. Both parties are trying to indoctrinate anyone who'll listen to their way of thought and idealogy. Now I appreciate the Christian point of view but what the fellow did to those Mormons were what he believed, it doesn't change anything.
yeah. the way he talked down to them wasn't called for. especially after he told that other one not to talk because he "proved him wrong". my pastor preached on "why he hates christians" and it was the best sermon ever.
preach on brother man!
lol bout time some of you watched it.. i found it pretty neat... again wish i could do that.
You could read the Bible..and the book of Mormon..so you'll know what it's all about.
Oh and history too. I'm sure it's not hard to counter alot of claims.
well yeah.. but I guess it'd be hard to remember...
the guy just puts alot of detail into and he just knows exactly what he's talking about..
the bible is... a big book...
I dont think I'd memorize all of it.. he sure looks like he did... or atleast he gave me that impression
I think he's not much better than them. I mean he openly says why do I need that?
I mean I'm not gonna say that Mormons are right..but him saying that the only book is the Bible is ludicruous for me at least. I think he could probably learn from the book of Mormon something as well.
First of all, they approached him making vague statements that they expected him to take for granted -- they assumed he was of lower intelligence and/or lacking a faith-based system by making such generalized, blatant inaccuracies about the life of Jesus.
If that wasn't insulting enough, they asked him if he wanted to learn. When he asked a question, they couldn't answer it, and resorting to shoving a pamphlet in his face! That is absolutely the height of insulting, to be so haughty as to assume you could teach someone, to obviously NOT have done your homework or even stopped to consider the real rationale behind your words, and finally when someone calls you out on it, you hide behind the doctrine you're purported to be spreading and preaching, and oh so knowledgeable about! Absolute idiocy!
I can understand individuals who feel the need to state either party is annoying simply because they are both of faith, however, the man on the right obviously has studied his faith. He actually KNOWS what he's talking about. You should respect that if nothing else. He was simply calling out these guys for their narrow, arrogant view of the situation. He didn't become upset until they galled him.
He very clearly states the rationale for why he doesn't "need" the book of Mormon, especially not when it's pushed on him by a couple of roving idiots that have little to say and far too high of an opinion of the nothing they are attempting to spread. The way they present it speaks very little for the book of Mormon, much like the way many Christians present the Bible is a poor representation of the book itself.
I'm not gonna disagree with you...but that doesn't mean he shouldn't take it. Like you said...many Christians represent the Bible poorly..but that doesn't make the book itself something you couldn't read and learn about.
That was the point I was making.
Last edited by Duff McCartney; 09-14-2007 at 10:49 PM.
We shouldn't be too hard on them. After all, he's probably the second black man they've met in their lives...
He's not obligated to take anything. If a salesperson comes to your door, you are not at fault if you say, "No thanks."
These guys KNEW he didn't want it and still tried to push it on him. Not only is that insensitive, but it's clear that if anyone is in need of wisdom, it's not him.
There are literally thousands of works of literature in this world that you can gain knowledge or wisdom from, or tens of thousands. He was most likely (knowing he's on camera) representing the idea that the Bible stands alone -- it is NOT necessary to have the book of Mormon, for Christians believe the Bible is the source of all wisdom*. Had he taken the book, he would have belied that notion.
I myself might have taken it, if nothing else than just to placate them. Of course, I wasn't the one being insulted and disrespected by missionaries on bikes attempting to teach me something they clearly know very little about.
*The original source of all wisdom. As said earlier, not the only book that can be gained from.
Don't send your kids to my door to invite me to learn about your cult. Don't send them to sell me cookies either. Send them to sell me beer and hard liquor at cut rate prices.
They'll probably just offer kotex and catnip.
As versed as he was, he obvious doesn't know much about the parts of the Bible describing loving & accepting persons of all kinds since he is part of a religious organization that supports black supremacy.
They're going to for wearing those gay helmets
When you mean calling someone out on it...do you mean saying "what you should know is that you are not in something that is divinely inspired God"?
Because it's what the black guy said.
That ignorant statement is the basis for his argument, and the basis for his derision towards them.
Both of them are trying support arguments that can't be proven.
Thus they are both ignorant. And stupid.
And if both parties actually knew anything they'd realize that they have nothing to prove - other than that they're idiots - and just move along with their lives.
He also dishonestly ommitted the first chapter of the Gospel John where it said," He came for is own, and his own wanted him not.". When he was trying to refute the JospehSmithsonians about wether jesus was rejected by the people.
He also said many very broad verses.
but are they really a black pseudo messianic jew supremacy group?
I wouldn't be interested in either works of fiction.
No, the basis for his derision towards them was the fact that they immediately assumed they could "teach" him something. Then, when they started presenting broad, open-ended statements about the life of Jesus, he asked them simple questions that they could not answer. Would you be okay with a 20th Century history professor who was giving out tests and quizzes and determining your grade for a semester but couldn't answer simple questions you had about say, WWII or the Vietnam War?
You are correct. There is nothing that you can prove from what they are discussing. Now please prove to me ANYTHING regarding the theory of relativity, or the Big Bang, or nearly anything within the confines of astrophysics.
Wait... what.... you can't? All you can't provide is evidence for the conclusions that scientists have discovered or hypothesized?
Wow. I guess EVERY scientist on the planet that hasn't conclusively "proven" something is a complete moron.
No, he did not. What, do you want him to quote the entire Bible regarding the crucifixion? He asked THEM what they meant by the statement THEY made. He asked them their own statement back to them, "Who are you saying rejected Jesus?"
They couldn't answer it. They couldn't answer a basic question about what they were preaching. Many thousands of people did NOT reject Christ, and many people flocked to the hillsides when he went to teach.
Moronmon wasn't making a blanketed statement. Morever they were confused why the dude made a big deal and painted it as a generalization. People did ultimately reject Christ's message. He was only accompanied by John the apostle Mary Magdelegne and his Mother during his crucifixion. People loved his message about peace, and his speeches about the unfair religous and governmental system. But they ultimately rejected his Kingdom of God message. So he was just being a jerk the way i see it.
I agree, that the mormons don't know .
[QUOTE=Cry Havoc]Yea, he was pissed that they went up to him clearly not knowing a lot about what they were trying to to teach, but he wasn't deriding them, just exposing them.No, the basis for his derision towards them was the fact that they immediately assumed they could "teach" him something. Then, when they started presenting broad, open-ended statements about the life of Jesus, he asked them simple questions that they could not answer.
But once he accused them of not practicing a religion inspired by God it went from exposing what they didn't know about Christian history, which isn't derision, to being narrow minded and derisive.
You're right, the Big Bang can't be proven, and NO scientist will say it can. Same thing with the theory of evolution. Science doesn't make the claim that they ARE true, but that there's a great possibilty that they are, based on what is known so far. Every theory can be potentially be disproved.You are correct. There is nothing that you can prove from what they are discussing. Now please prove to me ANYTHING regarding the theory of relativity, or the Big Bang, or nearly anything within the confines of astrophysics.
Wait... what.... you can't? All you can't provide is evidence for the conclusions that scientists have discovered or hypothesized?
Religion makes a claim that what it says is true. That nothing else is true. That it can't be denied.
The approach to science and religion are different in that the one (science) leaves room for further contemplation and the other (religion) doesn't. One is openminded and the other isn't. One raises more questions and the other has fueled wars.
Comparing the two is stupid.
.Wow. I guess EVERY scientist on the planet that hasn't conclusively "proven" something is a complete moron
I never said believing in something i.e. religion that hasn't been proven is moronic.
But to argue over religion is.
edit: double post
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
