Anyone can quote random lines from any book. The Bible was not written as one-liners. It has extended parables that you can easily draw individual verses from and distort the actual meaning by excluding the subtext. As for Revelation, well yeah... its about the end-times... of course there is going to be death to 'non-believers'; It is still a religion!
They were not random. They were specific examples of New Testament violence doctrines. Yet that is exactly how it exists today. A series of one-liners, precisely numbered by chapter and verse. Yes, it has. It also makes many direct and incontrovertible statements. Indeed. But as has been pointed out before . . . most religions call themselves a religion of peace while possessing some very violent tenets.
If that were all that evangelicals did then, no, it would not be a bad thing. The problem is that evangelicals are so far removed from sharing the gospel that the two no longer sound synonymous. The evangelical movement, whether they see themselves this way or not, have come to represent a political agenda. I cannot remember the last time that I saw a preacher on television to share the gospel, but within the past 24 hours I have seen several preachers on television to discuss their political views, or disagreement with someone else's political views. It is almost as if evangelicals threw away the notion of loving one another and sharing the gospel and are now trying to legislate the morality that they failed to create with their message. Further, I hate to see anyone play the victim card yet evangelicals play the victim card every Christmas. There is always a war on Christmas or a war on religion or a war on something else when, in fact, there is no such thing. Evangelicals also get a bad name when they try and change the history of our country to fit their narratives. Our government, by the design of the founding fathers, is a secular one. This is very important because without a secular government, these very same people could not have the freedom to worship as they see fit. Our founding fathers were not evangelicals! Lastly, evangelical voters always claim that they must carry their values into the voting booth. I have no problem with this because, in truth, all people carry their values into the voting booth. The problem I have is that they like to jump back and forth between Old Testament law and New Testament love depending upon the issue and which political party is advancing that issue. If evangelicals want the respect of being loving people who desire to share the gospel of Christ then they need to start doing so in practice and realize that they cannot legislate morality.
That's inaccurate. Evangelicals attempt to convert the heathens to fundamental Christianity. Islamists try to convert the infidels to fundamental Islam. The parallels are there even though the two groups are "fundamentally" at odds with each other.
To quote you, that's inaccurate. Sharing the good news is not an attempt to convert someone. Conversion occurs through personal acceptance of God's message and messenger. Your perception of an evangelical is likely personified in a person such as Jim Jones, where in truth it is a Christian mother sharing the story of Jesus with her children.
yes it is a trucking abomination have a little perspective dude. would you feel so grand if a person shared the good news about mohammad being the only prophet of allah with your impressionable childred? they wouldnt be trying to convert anyone of course. they would be yunno, just spreading the news. another way to say that would be to say that they are a dirty bastard liar.
of course it is. and the aim of this mother is not to convert her little atheist children into christians? (all people are born atheist)
