Fake Christian is fake

[Torvald Von Mansee]

http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/12/30/rod-parsley-promises-deliverance-from-the-stench-of-poverty/

[Buddahaid]

The very embodiment of the reason other peoples hate Americans. I can't believe anyone takes him (or is it Him?:shucks:) seriously. One can only hope there is a real God and eternal justice will be served.

[Snestorm]

Another Dirtbag, with a capital D.

[Skybird]

It's free market in action, isn't it. :88) He sells what people pay for. Don't blame him alone - also blame the people. Where there are winners, there must be loosers paying for the winner's golden cup, so I fear market regulation is out of the question here. :88)

[Torvald Von Mansee]

The very embodiment of the reason other peoples hate Americans. I can't believe anyone takes him (or is it Him?:shucks:) seriously. One can only hope there is a real God and eternal justice will be served.

Um, Americans aren't some collective all having the same views.

That aside, many American right wingers (which I assure you, this guy almost certainly is) in the U.S. call themselves Christian but don't seem to act it.

Example: there is a disturbingly well-selling series of books in the United States called "Left Behind," which can be described as Christian fantasy/American dominionist (or whatever). It has made its allegedly Christian authors fabulously wealthy, yet when asked why he doesn't give any of his money to charity, one of them responded: "Do you know how much I already pay in taxes?" Apparently he has never read Matthew 19:24.

[Blood_splat]

...And the pope lives like a king.

[August]

...And the pope lives like a king.

Obviously George Bush's fault...

[Schroeder]

@August

shhhhh....today it's always Obama's fault......but don't tell anyone....
:D

@Topic

Yeah those guys are freaks. I wonder how so many people can still fall for that crap.:dead:

[Buddahaid]

Um, Americans aren't some collective all having the same views.

That aside, many American right wingers (which I assure you, this guy almost certainly is) in the U.S. call themselves Christian but don't act it.

Example: there is a disturbingly well-selling series of books in the United States called "Left Behind," which can be described as Christian fantasy/American dominionist (or whatever). It has made its allegedly Christian authors fabulously wealthy, yet when asked why he doesn't give any of his money to charity, one of them responded: "Do you know how much I already pay in taxes?" Apparently he has never read Matthew 19:24.

Never meant to imply we were a collective, but these types make us all smell funny.

I believe the Pope is essentially the king of the Vatican which is sovereign territory. Not anywhere near the same thing as fleecing people in a bid to buy their way to heaven.

[frau kaleun]

yet when asked why he doesn't give any of his money to charity, one of them responded: "Do you know how much I already pay in taxes?" Apparently he has never read Matthew 19:24.

Well, as the good Lord said, "Render unto Caesar... and let the rest fend for themselves."

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Never meant to imply we were a collective, but these types make us all smell funny.

I believe the Pope is essentially the king of the Vatican which is sovereign territory. Not anywhere near the same thing as fleecing people in a bid to buy their way to heaven.

Ah!! I thought you were one of them foreign types that tend to paint Americans w/a broad brush (<- ironicalish!!). I've always found it bizarre that people who come off as otherwise enlightened and intelligent have this intellectual Achilles's heel, e.g., a flamingly liberal, Ivy League-educated Jewish associate of mine who thinks everyone has certainly inalienable rights except ONE demographic group!! Can you guess the group?

As far as people trying to gain some omnipotent & omniscient Being's favor, do they REALLY think He couldn't see through them and give them their just rewards?

[Hitman]

To which extent has this guy really a legion of followers giving him money? This and other similar scumbags are just so plain absurd that I always thought they must be simply a cover to clean "dirty" money coming form other delictive sources.:hmmm:

[Buddahaid]

I think they're just charismatic scam artists trying to get your grandmothers savings.

[Stealth Hunter]

Well, as the good Lord said, "Render unto Caesar... and let the rest fend for themselves."

Actually I believe the full quote was: "Render there unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. But when it cometh to things neither Caesar's nor God's, feeleth free to write them off; for yea, they be deductible."

;)

[AVGWarhawk]

I think they're just charismatic scam artists trying to get your grandmothers savings.

I agree on the grandma part and also money from the meek who are to inherit the earth. I do not agree with your first post concerning this is the reason folks outside the US hate Americans. Unless you are talking about this guy representing America as self-indulgent slobs. Then yes, I see what you mean. Not everyone is self-indulgent but sometimes I feel the rest of the world see America as self -indulgent. To a degree this is correct. At any rate, any church were the pastor is living larger than the congregation is suspect. I have left a church that had a pastor living in house with 5 bedrooms, took the entire family to Disneyland and Hawaii. He wears expensive suits and expensive jewerly. His wife is never seen in the same dress twice. Last time I checked pastors are to emulate their lives as Jesus lived. At least this is what I was told growing up Episcopalian. My pastor had a modest house, a modest automobile and Searsucker suit. People are gullible and will send in money.

It all started with the Bakers. Tammy Baker....uggggghhhhhh :o


http://www.streamingfaith.com/UserFiles/Image/Inline/News/jim_and_tammy_faye_bakker.jpg

[frau kaleun]

Actually I believe the full quote was: "Render there unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. But when it cometh to things neither Caesar's nor God's, feeleth free to write them off; for yea, they be deductible."


"And accept thee cash from thy flock, and suffer them to use Visa and MasterCard also, for the multitudes surely have more credit than cash and the finance charges will accrue to them alone. Money orders also shalt thee accept. But beware thee of the personal check, for verily I say unto you that sometimes it is of rubber devised."

[AVGWarhawk]

Christianity began as a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. When it went to Athens, it became a philosophy. When it went to Rome, it became an organization. When it spread throughout Europe, it became a culture. When it came to America, it became a business.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Wolves/greedy.htm

[NeonSamurai]

Was a buisness (empire) well before it hit even Europe.

In god we trust, all others pay cash :O:

[AVGWarhawk]

Was a buisness (empire) well before it hit even Europe.

In god we trust, all others pay cash :O:

I also heard as, 'God rules the Heaven. Cash rules the Earth.'

[August]

Not everyone is self-indulgent but sometimes I feel the rest of the world see America as self -indulgent.

You should cut yourself a little slack there AVG! :D

[Oberon]

Why is it I get an urge to go over there and kick some of his tables over when I read that? :hmmm:

[AVGWarhawk]

You should cut yourself a little slack there AVG! :D

I will admit it...sometimes I'm self-indulgent. That is my first step to my cure. :D

[Stealth Hunter]

"And accept thee cash from thy flock, and suffer them to use Visa and MasterCard also, for the multitudes surely have more credit than cash and the finance charges will accrue to them alone. Money orders also shalt thee accept. But beware thee of the personal check, for verily I say unto you that sometimes it is of rubber devised."

:har:

[Task Force]

pff... I hate guys like this...

my grandfater gave almost all of my grandparents money away to a ******* off because he told them (people who watch his show.) that if they gave him money that they would go to heaven... What a lie... telling people they will goto a place that dosent exist...

And then... because of him... they lost there house. makeing them move away to anouther that in the future a loose vent would cause him to fall and kill him...:nope:

People who do things like this are pigs... nothing but pigs...

I wish people would wake up and smell the coffee... when you die, there is no magical place that you go to...

[frau kaleun]

Why is it I get an urge to go over there and kick some of his tables over when I read that? :hmmm:

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=144&pictureid=986

[Oberon]

:har::har::har::har:

:yeah:

Nice one Frau Kaleun :salute:

[frau kaleun]

It seemed appropriate.

I also have it on pretty good authority (my own) that using religion to con the elderly out of their lifesavings makes the baby Jesus cry.

[frau kaleun]

BTW my alternate caption was "I am so tired of these **********ing moneychangers in this **********ing temple" but it just wouldn't fit.

[Aramike]

Ah, the humor in this...

I just LOVE how liberals get all worked-up over some pseudo-religious money-maker which, in the final analysis, doesn't affect anyone who chooses to not be affected.

All the while, in the meantime you have scientists presenting fraudalant data to the world in order to support climate change and policies that would affect us all, and those same liberals are suspiciously silent or defensive.

So let's just be honest, shall we? Any dishonesty isn't what bothers you. No, rather, it's that they are Christians being dishonest.

Please do tell how you're able to reconcile your clearly diluted moral compass with your obvious biases and able to keep some sense of intellectual pride...

[longam]

simple - beware the false prophets

[Buddahaid]

Ah, the humor in this...

I just LOVE how liberals get all worked-up over some pseudo-religious money-maker which, in the final analysis, doesn't affect anyone who chooses to not be affected.

All the while, in the meantime you have scientists presenting fraudalant data to the world in order to support climate change and policies that would affect us all, and those same liberals are suspiciously silent or defensive.

So let's just be honest, shall we? Any dishonesty isn't what bothers you. No, rather, it's that they are Christians being dishonest.

Please do tell how you're able to reconcile your clearly diluted moral compass with your obvious biases and able to keep some sense of intellectual pride...

Simple. I don't consider what he does Christian. There is nothing Christlike about it, and it does harm the families of the "victims". Furthermore, I think my moral compass is far truer than his since I don't make a living bilking people in the name of God.

[August]

I wish people would wake up and smell the coffee... when you die, there is no magical place that you go to...

Got some proof of that or are you just trying to sell a load of bull crap as big as a televangelists?

[longam]

Simple Example

Christ's Warning
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits. Not every one who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father Who is in heaven. On that day many will say to Me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your Name, and cast out demons in Your Name, and do many mighty works in Your Name?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you evildoers.'" (Matthew 7:15-23 RSV)

[Buddahaid]

Got some proof of that or are you just trying to sell a load of bull crap as big as a televangelists?

I'm going to Disneyland!

[frau kaleun]

I'm going to Disneyland!

I'm not sure where I'm going, but they did give me the cutest little handbasket.

[Platapus]

A fool and his money are soon parted.

I did not notice this guy threatening anyone with a gun.

If people choose to send this jerk money.......

“I just love to talk about your money. Let me be very clear — I want your money. I deserve it.

Sounds like a politician to me. :nope:

[August]

Sounds like a politician to me. :nope:

No way. A politician would never be so direct and open about his intentions

[Snestorm]

To which extent has this guy really a legion of followers giving him money? This and other similar scumbags are just so plain absurd that I always thought they must be simply a cover to clean "dirty" money coming form other delictive sources.:hmmm:

A very wise observation.

[CaptainHaplo]

How ironic is it that those that want to point out this crook, who plies his swindle under the name of Xtianity, is equated to be the same as any other that chooses to wear the mantle of "Christian". Yet the same people that make that generalization are usually the same that tell everyone that you cannot take "wacko" extremist Muslims as representative of all Muslims.

Can anyone say "double standard"?

I have always said that those who claim Islam is a peaceful religion, perverted by a few wacko's, need to weed those wackos out. As such, I have no problem saying that mainstream Xtianity needs to denounce snake oil salesmen like this nut the same way. As a man of the cloth, I have no problem saying he is a fraud, nor do I have any hesitation in advising no one follows what he says.

The reality is there are always gullible people, and thus there will always be con artists who take advantage of them. The difference here is that he hides behind a cloak of "religiosity" when any person with the knowledge of the Bible and its tenents can see the holes in his "theology". For the extremists in the Muslim world, they simply are following the theology as it is plainly written. Therein lies the contrast.

[Aramike]

Simple. I don't consider what he does Christian. There is nothing Christlike about it, and it does harm the families of the "victims". Furthermore, I think my moral compass is far truer than his since I don't make a living bilking people in the name of God.I'm not comparing him to you. You missed my point entirely.

[Snestorm]

Ah, the humor in this...

I just LOVE how liberals get all worked-up over some pseudo-religious money-maker which, in the final analysis, doesn't affect anyone who chooses to not be affected.

Your catagorizing method is flawed.
Do you have a Conservative Party in your state?
Or is conservative Republican just a label that politicians and "The Religiouse Right" like to annoint themselves with?

[Snestorm]

I'm not sure where I'm going, but they did give me the cutest little handbasket.

We're off to see the Wizzard.

[Task Force]

Got some proof of that or are you just trying to sell a load of bull crap as big as a televangelists?

no... just what I believe... do I have to, Im not trying to tell you BELIEVE THIS with big flashing lights, just stateing my opinion...

[August]

Or is conservative Republican just a label that politicians and "The Religiouse Right" like to annoint themselves with?

People have always annointed themselves with misleading labels, often to the chagrin of everyone else.

[Castout]

Christianity began as a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. When it went to Athens, it became a philosophy. When it went to Rome, it became an organization. When it spread throughout Europe, it became a culture. When it came to America, it became a business.



Very enlightening.

And the US exports globally....

[Aramike]

Your catagorizing method is flawed.
Do you have a Conservative Party in your state?
Or is conservative Republican just a label that politicians and "The Religiouse Right" like to annoint themselves with?I'm not talking about groups. I'm talking about ideologues.

Yes, I think that what many of these religious types do regarding money is absurd. But they are hardly worth mentioning in the grand scheme of things, when you have scientific types engaging in similar activities that can harm EVERYONE regardless of their personal choices.

And yet, people from one side of the spectrum just love to level attacks on those religious frauds while completely ignoring/supporting the scientific frauds, who are attempting to do far more damage to our global economy than any hokey preacher could hope to do.

So my point was simple: obviously those leveling the "morality" complaints about those in religious garb while avoiding those in lab coats are, in and of themselves, morally clouded.

[Buddahaid]

When it went to Rome, it organized and became a business with huge land holdings and political clout, as in the Holy Roman Empire.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Ah, the humor in this...

I just LOVE how liberals get all worked-up over some pseudo-religious money-maker which, in the final analysis, doesn't affect anyone who chooses to not be affected.

Strawman. And the heirs of family money given to this Hellbound mofo certainly are affected, and they didn't choose to give that money.



All the while, in the meantime you have scientists presenting fraudalant data to the world in order to support climate change and policies that would affect us all, and those same liberals are suspiciously silent or defensive.

Some people also think the Earth is flat. Do you feel the need to point out that the Earth is flat, or just dismiss it for the stupidity it so clearly is?



So let's just be honest, shall we? Any dishonesty isn't what bothers you. No, rather, it's that they are Christians being dishonest.

Strawman, again


Please do tell how you're able to reconcile your clearly diluted moral compass with your obvious biases and able to keep some sense of intellectual pride...

Strawman, yet again.

[CaptainHaplo]

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Straw man arguments often arise in public debates even when less flawed arguments could be found to support the same position.

(Hypothetical) prohibition (http://www.subsim.com/wiki/Prohibition) debate:
Person A: We should liberalize the laws on beer (http://www.subsim.com/wiki/Beer). Person B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification. The proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has exaggerated this to a position harder to defend, i.e., "unrestricted access to intoxicants".Debating around a straw man

Strictly speaking, there are three ways to deal with a straw man setup.
1. Using the terms of the straw man and refuting the theory itself. (Note: A weakness of this retort is that agreeing to use the terminology of the opponent may deflect the debate to a secondary one about the opponent's assumptions).
2. Clarifying the original theory. This may involve explicitly pointing out the straw man. In the example above, such a response might be: I said relax laws on beer but nothing about other stronger intoxicants.
3. Questioning the disputation.

Funny Torvald - I see you doing nothing but CLAIMING a straw man arguement - yet not using any of the real ways to demonstrate it as one. Specifically - your trying to ignore points and dismiss them because you have no real rebuttal - rather than pointing out how the response was not accurately portraying your own position.

I have no problem with calling out a straw man arguement when there is one - but show it for what it is when its there, instead of using the normal, liberal approach of yelling "straw man!' every time there is no real, factual rebuttal possible.

[Platapus]

instead of using the normal, liberal approach of yelling "straw man!' every time there is no real, factual rebuttal possible.

Liberal approach????? WTF? :doh:

[CaptainHaplo]

Platapus, that was intended purposely as a generalization of what is seen here on this forum, and not an overarching generalization of all "liberals".

Many here, and I won't name names since they demonstrate the point enough, do exactly what was done here. Instead of saying "this is a straw man arguement becase I said X and your debating Y", many here just dismiss points they cannot handle with "Strawman" and think that they score some magical point or something because they then ignore the issues raised.

I simply am rather disappointed that instead of tackling a debate head on, some try to dismiss them with the strawman claim because they have no other recourse.

[Buddahaid]

People are being conditioned to do that in our sound-bite sized world of instant everything. And, it's in the way children are schooled today.

[frau kaleun]

We're off to see the Wizzard.

Discworld road trip (http://wiki.lspace.org/wiki/Rincewind)? Count me in!

[Aramike]

Strawman. And the heirs of family money given to this Hellbound mofo certainly are affected, and they didn't choose to give that money.Umm, heirs are legally entitled nothing prior to the death of whom holds the estate. Ergo, heirs lose nothing because nothing is theirs to lose.Some people also think the Earth is flat. Do you feel the need to point out that the Earth is flat, or just dismiss it for the stupidity it so clearly is?Hilarious how (a) either my point is way beyond your capabilities of comprehension; or (b) you feel there that your parallel applies more to YOUR argument than it does to mine.

Let me enlighten you, shall I? I'm an atheist, scientific, centrist who believes in congruity and semi-deontological moralities. The fact is that, the belief in either of these absurdities (extortionist robe or extortionist lab coat) is misguided. Furthermore, the fact is that, belief in the robe is a personal decision, but belief in the lab coat is currently the topic of international interest and will affect our economies in ways unprecedented.

Either way, I suppose you probably just "copied and pasted" that response of yours from some other troll forum because it neither addresses the point nor does it actually make sense in context.Strawman, yet again. First of all, you obviously have no idea what a "strawman argument" is. Here, because you like to use the term so much, I'll define it for you: its a fallacy based upon an opponent's position misrepresented.

I am not misrepresenting an opponent's position. Furthermore (and more importantly) I am not proposing any fallacy.

In fact, I believe that these exploiters of religion have a special place in hell reserved for them if there is such a thing. But that's no matter. My point was merely that the same people who spend so much time and energy focusing on the untruths of religious practicioners willingly IGNORE the untruths of those who support their agendas.

But, alas, I highly doubt that someone who clearly has no clue as to even the definition of a "strawman argument" would have been able to understand such a point. As such, it wasn't for you.

[Aramike]

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man


Straw man arguments often arise in public debates even when less flawed arguments could be found to support the same position.

(Hypothetical) prohibition (http://www.subsim.com/wiki/Prohibition) debate:
Person A: We should liberalize the laws on beer (http://www.subsim.com/wiki/Beer). Person B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification. The proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has exaggerated this to a position harder to defend, i.e., "unrestricted access to intoxicants".Debating around a straw man

Strictly speaking, there are three ways to deal with a straw man setup.
1. Using the terms of the straw man and refuting the theory itself. (Note: A weakness of this retort is that agreeing to use the terminology of the opponent may deflect the debate to a secondary one about the opponent's assumptions).
2. Clarifying the original theory. This may involve explicitly pointing out the straw man. In the example above, such a response might be: I said relax laws on beer but nothing about other stronger intoxicants.
3. Questioning the disputation.

Funny Torvald - I see you doing nothing but CLAIMING a straw man arguement - yet not using any of the real ways to demonstrate it as one. Specifically - your trying to ignore points and dismiss them because you have no real rebuttal - rather than pointing out how the response was not accurately portraying your own position.

I have no problem with calling out a straw man arguement when there is one - but show it for what it is when its there, instead of using the normal, liberal approach of yelling "straw man!' every time there is no real, factual rebuttal possible.Dammit, how did I miss this?

You beat me to it, Haplo. :salute:

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Platapus, that was intended purposely as a generalization of what is seen here on this forum, and not an overarching generalization of all "liberals".

Many here, and I won't name names since they demonstrate the point enough, do exactly what was done here. Instead of saying "this is a straw man arguement becase I said X and your debating Y", many here just dismiss points they cannot handle with "Strawman" and think that they score some magical point or something because they then ignore the issues raised.

I simply am rather disappointed that instead of tackling a debate head on, some try to dismiss them with the strawman claim because they have no other recourse.

LOL!!! React to an accusation of a strawman w/another strawman? Truly pathetic.

Did it ever occur to you that our time is finite, and one might not want to waste it?

[Aramike]

LOL!!! React to an accusation of a strawman w/another strawman? Truly pathetic.

Did it ever occur to you that our time is finite, and one might not want to waste it?As has been demonstrated, you have no idea what a strawman argument is. That is what is truly pathetic. :yep:

[AVGWarhawk]

The last I heard the strawman wanted a brain. :hmmm:

[Oberon]

Discworld road trip (http://wiki.lspace.org/wiki/Rincewind)? Count me in!

:up::yeah::up:

[frau kaleun]

:up::yeah::up:

Hope you don't mind if I bring my Luggage.

I mean, it's not like I can stop him from coming anyway.

[Oberon]

So long as you don't turn up on Binky I do not mind ;):up:

[antikristuseke]

CAN DEATH COME ALONG ASWELL?

I think he should

[frau kaleun]

If Rincewind's around, Death won't be too far off.

And my ALL CAP reply got un-allcapped when I hit submit. How did you get a full sentence to go through in all caps?

[antikristuseke]

I tacked on a sentence not in all caps.

[kiwi_2005]

Every country has one, we have our very own Brian Tamaki self proclaimed bishop who said 6 years ago that within 5 years he will be prime minister of New Zealand :har:

Just recently he gave all his specially selected 750 brothers (who are his body guards) a gold ring. With this ring they all become binded to Brian & his wife, they are to protect him and his wife, they must honor them with gifts birthdays/anniversays etc.,. They are never to talk about them in a bad way and when Brian or his wife are present they must ask to speak before speaking. Has many followers all suckers paying for him and his wifes lifestyle. They became millionaires out of their organization. He is nothing but a false preacher who is vain & loves money. Wolves in sheep's clothing. :nope:

[frau kaleun]

I tacked on a sentence not in all caps.

Aha. Clever.

[Sailor Steve]

If Rincewind's around, Death won't be too far off.

And my ALL CAP reply got un-allcapped when I hit submit. How did you get a full sentence to go through in all caps?
I have that happen sometimes. Other times it works as advertised. No idea why.