What happens because Benny Hinn has evangelised Africa

Status
Not open for further replies.
So you don't hijack a thread, here are some links to other places this has been discussed on the PB.

http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/lc-109-images-Christ-bibliography-32486/
http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/idolatry-mel-gibson-s-passion-Christ-movie-371/
 
the making any representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature:

P.S. I think I've been to your church before, is it over there by the mall? Or am I thinking of another one?

This is a confessional board and I do not think that you sinned and I do not think that most confessional Christians would think that they sinned under your curcumstances. You did not MAKE the image in your mind. If the sins of the fathers are not put on their sons, I do not think that the sin of that African minister is going to be charged to you. I love the confession but I think you are reading to much into it. Otherwise all evil men would have to do is put up pictures supposing to be of our Lord all over the place and the Church would be confined to the house.

I do not want to argue about this, I know that many on this board have differing views and I never would post a image but I have never heard a person say that it was a sin to see what they consider another man's sin. God bless, I do like and read your post. I was not asking to start a rabbit trail, I simply wanted a answer.

P.s.s. Our Church is near the Westgate Mall.
 
These people are lunatics and the people that say that evangelicals are everything from Benny Hinn to R.C. Sproul should watch this, that stuff is satanic
 
Did anyone else see this as a emotional, exploitive, and sensationalized news story strategically added to an unending list of reports that serve to undermine and discredit the Christian faith and ideology?

The "pastor" and the "churches" were presented as representative nuts making merchandize of "families" who were not smart enough to protect themselves from the "epidemic of child witchcraft accusations, raging in the name of Jesus." (Yeah, they were false, but nothing in the report distinguished honest pastors from greedy, ruthless ones.)

The report asks "How did this happen?" (and cited "experts" that had nothing of the real Jesus to mention.) The report said, "Experts say all this is happening because of a toxic mixture of warfare, economic collapse, and greedy, ruthless pastors".

The only sane groups presented by the reporters were the UN, Save the Children, and the reporter who wouldn't give his money to contribute to the nuts and their ideology. Even the Congolese government was discredited and dismissed.

The whole premise was that it is a problem that begs for intervention by the sane (the UN, Save the Children, and the reporters). As a result of the "report", pastors, churches, the sovereign government of Congo, and the families themselves are understood to be excluded from being able to solve the problem, because they are the root cause of the problem, or the helpless and vulnerable victims in need of "expert" salvation.



bryan
tampa, fl
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top