sad that so many are jumping on the handful of extreme statements. I dare ONE of you to produce an entire sermon, dissect it and show that the overall intent is negative or positive.
He promotes an insidious agenda that at the very least harms all of us and you say we should forget all that because you can cite good things he has done and said. And now you want to tweak that into 'there is no whole sermon that fits exactly into your arbitrary template'.
Golly gee Mr. slick.....it's mighty nice of you to try and help out but that sounds like a really bad line of reasoning! He has influenced a lot of people with a message that perpetuates division and hatred. I don't care how many times he has also helped an old lady across the street.
CUDA wrote:So what you are saying is that we should ignore those handfull of extreme comments and just accept him because of his handfull of non-extreme comments. Hrm doesn't seem quite right that we do that.
I'm saying that the whole of his work seems to tend toward the positive, with some wacky stuff thrown in. The whle thing, as I said, came to me when he was in Delaware last week. He just didn't seem all that radical, and the thought occurred that perhaps it would be better if the African American community had more Rev. Wrights and less Jesse Jackson Jr.'s......
"The Party told you to reject all evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."
George Orwell---"1984"
CUDA wrote:So what you are saying is that we should ignore those handfull of extreme comments and just accept him because of his handfull of non-extreme comments. Hrm doesn't seem quite right that we do that.
I'm saying that the whole of his work seems to tend toward the positive, with some wacky stuff thrown in. The whle thing, as I said, came to me when he was in Delaware last week. He just didn't seem all that radical, and the thought occurred that perhaps it would be better if the African American community had more Rev. Wrights and less Jesse Jackson Jr.'s......
The whole of Jerry Sanduskys life seemed to tend toward the positive too. It wasn't wise for his employers and supervisors to ignore the signs of his negative leanings however.
In the case of someone who's total efforts are to influence and shape the thought processes of thousands of people it is not at all comforting to know that it is only a lesser percentage of those machinations that are harmful! Considering the most effective lies are the ones wrapped in truth it is alarming not comforting.
I’m pretty sure he toned down his crap, when Obama got elected, and I’m also sure that the person that hates white people and America, and uses the word of god to preach it, still exists in there somewhere.
callmeslick wrote:seriously, what did he ever really say that was that bad, in the context of that school of ministers/preachers who tend toward over the top. All he ever said that got people's panties in a bunch was to paraphrase, that 'God should damn America for slavery', or some such. So what? I mean, I've sort of said the same thing for years to certain friends who insinuate that God is going to punish America for homosexual freedoms and stuff like that. I always retort with the observation that if God didn't smite us to ashes over enslaving other people, I figure homosexual tolerance or abortion rights aren't exactly going to set him off.
I think the delineation stems from evidence of precedent. There are biblical examples of cities being struck down for sexual immorality, but not for slavery.
I also agree with the comment that Jesus stayed out of politics, and that should normative for our religious leaders. Jesus took on the religious establishment with a passion, but he stayed out of the political leadership of the time. Similarly, I think that people these days should mind the difference between taking on religion and taking on politics in the name of religion. I think that generally that means that proclamations of condemnation upon political entities are God's business, not ours as individuals. Do I think that America will decline, and that the decline can be connected to change in religious attitude? Yes. Would I state it that way? No.. I'm make it personal for each individual person rather than national.
Arch Linux x86-64, Openbox
"We'll just set a new course for that empty region over there, near that blackish, holeish thing. " Zapp Brannigan
The guy is no different than Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, or any of the white preachers that also promote hate. They have their good and they have their bad. Depends on what you're looking for.
CobGobbler wrote:The guy is no different than Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, or any of the white preachers that also promote hate. They have their good and they have their bad. Depends on what you're looking for.
show me one word that Billy Graham EVER said that could be construed to say he was promoting hate.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Well of course you don't Spidey, but he still said it regardless of the forum it was delivered in. Considering he did his schtick long ago before there were recorded transcripts of everything it's pretty hard to find. But it took me all of three seconds to find one thing he said that could be considered promoting hate. But I'm not defending Wright because I don't agree with him either, but the assertion that Wright is alone in saying what he does is simply wrong. He placates to his audience and simultaneously feeds and preys off their fear. Plenty of reverends that do the exact same thing. That was my only, only point.
edit: As a question about personal conversations, do you think woodchip or Cuda would have an issue if Obama was taped having a private conversation with Holder and said something like that about the Jewish people? I'm thinking yes???
Graham was referencing the book of revelation 3:9 where it says " that there are those that claim to be Jews but are liars and those that do belong to the synagogue of satan" he never said what you claim.
9 I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you
Nice story though. A lie but a nice story none the less
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
An earlier release of tapes in 2002 shocked fans of Graham, who is heard agreeing with Nixon as the president rails against liberal Jews' political activism and media clout. Graham tells Nixon how Jews befriend him but adds,"They don't know how I really feel about what they're doing to this country."
You prove my point though Cuda. Everyone sees and hears what they want to. We can go in circles or you can, for some unknown reason, claim that only Wright engages in the delivery of hate and none of the people you like do the same thing.
They don't know how I really feel about what they're doing to this country."
and what does that mean? does it mean GD Jews F'm all, OR does it mean I don't really like what they are doing to this country. seems to me that he was more pointing to the Liberal aspect of what was going on then the racial. Still it doesn't seem like it comes anywhere near to what Wright or even Falwell or Robertson have said in the past.
plus you stated that Graham used a slur by saying that Jews were from the synagogue of Satan. which he CLEARLY didn't
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
