# Yet Another Movie That Might Change Your Life ... or At Least Make You Think **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 7, 2001, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069 "2001-03-07T06:17:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/121 "2001-03-17T05:59:41Z")
**jshore** observed in another thread that the posters on the SDMB appear to be living in parallel universes. I think that applies here. More so than any other poster, FoG’s words can cause my eyes to bulge, my jaw to drop, my entire being to take on the characteristics of the icon, 😕. But, hey, that’s only because I don’t run into Charismatic Fundamentalists too often. OTOH, I meet athiests all the time. FoG: In the (mainline Protestant) church environment that I grew up in, your prophesying would be seen as peculiar at best and sacrilegious at worst. No joke. As for traveling Prophets, they were perceived as 19th century rural scam artists. (See Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain for details.) Not that we gave too much thought to these things: mostly they were outside our frame of reference. For FoG, OTOH, I suspect that prophesying, speaking in tongues, witnessing, etc. etc. are commonplace. For me announcing, even tentatively that, “I just got a message from G\*d and it’s for you”, is… well, I’m stunned. (Isn’t the internet great?) I just wanted to add some perspective: _some_ of the vehemence that you have received has some doctrinal basis. And some of it may reflect a framework that you take for granted and that others find strange, even potentially dangerous (the doctrine, not you). Things taken for granted are by definition not completely thought out. > [@](#): > > _Foggy sez:_ So yes, I believe Christians are harassed in the USA today, and no, I am not going to try to prove to you it’s true, nor do I care if you do or don’t believe it’s true. Houston, we have a consensus. Christians are not persecuted in this country. But, IMHO, they are harassed. Sometimes for their beliefs. (eg yosemitebabe) As is every other group and individual from time to time. ---
**Author:** ![Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/df788c/32.png) [@Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/122 "2001-03-17T07:02:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FriendofGod \* > \*\*Ben, first, before I address any of your quotes, let me just say this overall: you strike me as someone who has made up his mind ahead of time what you will think no matter what I say. \*\* You know, it’s interesting: this is at least the second time that you’ve complained that people won’t change their mind no matter what you say. But: when you claim that Christians are much more persecuted than atheists and Wiccans in America, and people provide a mountain of evidence to the contrary, you don’t admit that you’re wrong. Instead, you say things like, “Now I understand how atheists and Wiccans might feel _as if_ they were as persecuted as Christians.” Or you say that the front page of the newspaper is the “secular humanist” section- and when a similar mountain of evidence is provided to prove you wrong, it makes no impression on you. > [@](#): > > \*\* > You seem hellbent on attacking me personally, and you will use and twist whatever tools you run across (including my own mistakes) to accomplish your goal. And you seem to be having tremendous fun doing it. \*\* Oh, I assure you, it isn’t fun. Look, FoG, this wouldn’t have to be such a big deal _if you held to certain standards of intellectual integrity and personal honor._ You will make some statement and provide only the tiniest shred of pseudo-evidence, but you won’t admit you’re wrong when there’s a mountain of evidence against you. If you’d just change your mind every once in a while, I and a lot of other people would have a lot more respect for you. Or take the whole prophecy thing: you made a prophecy, and it was a silly, stupid prophecy, and pldennison picked up on that fact and criticised you for it, and _even when he was shown to be right_ you don’t seem to be willing or able to even try to understand his position. Pldennison was frustrated because your personal communique from God was no more substantial than the well-known tricks of charlatans. Somehow, you still don’t seem to understand that. Out of one side of your mouth you say hey, I made a mistake, no big deal- but out of the other side of your mouth you’re still trying to paint pldennison’s criticism of you as being a criticism of God. That’s very arrogant of you, and it’s something I see a lot of from fundamentalists. I remember talking to someone on the LBMB about theology, and when I showed how illogical her argument was, she began a self-righteous tirade in which she asked me, “How DARE you question God?” But I wasn’t questioning God. I was questioning his arrogant, illogical, self-appointed representative, and trying to show that she did not really represent God, and that it was arrogant of her to portray herself as such. Tris, a Christian, explained in detail that he was similarly criticising you, not God, for setting yourself up as God’s representative, and he also made the point that your “prophecy” had a very negative effect in turning people against Christianity. I think that he made a very valid point, but even now you brush it off and say that your prophecy was “neutral” in effect. It’s interesting to me that you reserved all your venom for pldennison, and ignored Tris. Perhaps it’s harder for you to paint Tris’s criticisms of you as being criticisms of God. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Having said that, unless you drop your judgmental crusade, this will be my final comment on the subject. \*\* The problem is that no matter what I do, you will see my criticisms as rude. It seems to me that things typically play themselves out like this: You make an ill-advised statement. Somebody points out the flaw in your statement. You ignore them. They point out the flaw again, and ask for your comment. You ignore them some more. They complain that you’re not addressing their point. You declare that you’re fully justified in ignoring them if they’re going to be so rude. Now, maybe that’s not the way it looks to you, but I don’t think I’m alone in saying that that’s the way it looks to me. For example, in another thread quix and I both pointed out that the only time you seem to describe an atheist as being polite is when one agrees with you. > [@](#): > > \*\* > You do not deserve any respect with the way you have raised these issues, and I will not give you any. \*\* Actually, FoG, I don’t think you were giving me any respect in the first place. Like I said, I once complained that you were ignoring my arguments and treating me as conversion fodder, and you replied by saying that no, that’s not the case, you were really trying to cut through all my arguments that obscured the fact that I need to find Jesus. Again, I’m not the only one here who feels like you look for excuses to ignore what people say- and most of the time you don’t even need an excuse. For whatever reason, people here feel like you treat them disrespectfully. You might think you’re being very polite, and fundamentalist Christians usually do. But to paraphrase Paul, you’re in Rome now, and you should think about why you’re stepping on so many toes. I’ll give you a hint: it’s not because you’re a Christian. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Read it again, Sherlock (emphasis mine): \*\* Now who’s being rude? > [@](#): > > \*\* > I pretty much bluntly said from the get go I wasn’t 100% sure. Obviously, since it was inaccurate, how can you or I or anyone call it a prophesy at all? \*\* This is just semantic hairsplitting, as Monty has already pointed out. You yourself used the term “prophesy” to describe your actions several times. Qualifying it with the claim that you aren’t 100% sure doesn’t make it any less an attempt at prophesy. And as for your last sentence, it’s like saying that you can’t be a “false prophet,” since if you’re false, you can’t be a prophet. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Yeah, but did you bother to quote it? \*\* Why should I have? I had already quoted lengthy excerpts, and was worried about making my hijack any longer. Am I obliged to quote everything that everyone said to you about your prophecy attempt? > [@](#): > > \*\*You neglected to mention that he said what he did **before** it became clear that I had missed God. \*\* This is simply an outright lie. Anyone looking at my post can tell that I did, in fact, portray pldennison’s remark as coming before matt revealed that you were wrong. For all your self-righteous posturing about how “rude” people are being to you, you have borne false witness against me. How are we supposed to respond to that? > [@](#): > > \*\* > Nonetheless, his contempt for the very idea that God could speak was pretty forceful and I don’t regret calling him on it one bit. Here’s a sample: > > > [@](#): > > > > OK, how many in the room right now can say, in all honesty, that there is not “something going on at your job that is causing great confusion”? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? > > > > That’s condescending crap, FoG, the kind of overly-broad nonsense that is published every day in newspaper horoscopes around the world. Please, please, do not treat people with such intellectual contempt, as if they just full off of a turnip truck. It does absolutely nothing to legitimize your position. \*\* This shows contempt for the very idea that God could speak? > [@](#): > > \*\* > It was pretty bitter bile, not to mention inaccurate. He made drastic assumptions (especially that I was trying to ‘prove a point’) and made it seem like it was ‘easy prophesy’ (ie, that surely _EVERYONE_ was having confusion at work). It’s still pretty funny to me that the fact that what I said was _wrong_ proved pldennison wrong as well! \*\* But it is an easy prophesy. Most people do have jobs, and plenty of people have problems at work. For matt to be unemployed was, as pldennison said before, just a long-shot that came through to make you look utterly foolish. If Matt hadn’t been unemployed, you could have fished around. “_Everything_ is good at your job, Matt? Even if the confusion isn’t happening to you, could it be happening to someone else? Maybe God is asking you to talk to your coworkers and offer them some help for their own confusion.” For you to claim that matt’s unemployment proves that it wasn’t an easy prophecy is a bit like claiming that “you are having pain in your feet” wouldn’t have been an easy prophecy, since for all you know matt might not have any legs. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Again … the problem here was the comment was made _before_ he knew one way or the other if it was right or wrong. It’s two separate issues. This is not too hard Ben. Look at which posts come first. \*\* Again, anyone looking at my post can tell which post came first. For you to imply otherwise is to make false accusations. > [@](#): > > \*\* > For we know _in part_ and we prophesy _in part_, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears (I Corinthians 13:9-10) _(ie, as opposed to knowing and prophesying perfectly, it’s ‘in part’)_ \*\* Thank you, FoG, that was what I was looking for. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Note: I am not a prophet at all, nor have I ever claimed to be one, so how can I be a false one? 😉 \*\* As Monty has pointed out, this is simply ridiculous. You claimed to have made prophecies, both to matt and to your Christian friends. You even gave the distinct impression that at least some of those prophecies were true, since you contrasted them with your failed prophecy to matt. Ergo, you claim to be a prophet. As I pointed out before in another thread, you have a tendency to disavow your own actions by redefining them. (See, for example, the “conversion fodder” example above. See also the earlier discussion of Left Behind ads on racecars.) > [@](#): > > \*\* > Regarding the Pat Robertson quotes … giving your penchant for quoting out of context, \*\* Again, you repeat your lie. I did not quote out of context at all. For all your complaints about how I have presented a false timeline, the sequence of quotes is precisely accurate, and identical to the sequence which you insist on. > [@](#): > > \*\* > I’d have to hear the entire context of his quote about South Africa to even begin to comment. I have no idea what his overall point was and if I agree or disagree. Even if I disagree, why would that not make him a Christian? \*\* Let me get this straight: you can’t be a homosexual and a Christian, but you can be a racist and a Christian? > [@](#): > > \*\* Interestingly, many nonbelievers think the exact opposite: that ‘religious people’ have no place in the political process and should not even run for office. \*\* Evidence, please. > [@](#): > > \*\* > You know what? It finally hit me about a week ago that I could care less if anyone believes Christians are harassed in America today! There are many more important issues I am concerned with. So yes, I believe Christians are harassed in the USA today, and no, I am not going to try to prove to you it’s true, nor do I care if you do or don’t believe it’s true. \*\* Again, FoG, things would be a lot more pleasant for you on the SDMB if you were more honest. Your claim was that Christians have more to fear from bigotry than atheists and Wiccans do. I asked you to back that up. Rather than back it up, you changed the claim, and started talking about how Christians are “harassed,” and how you don’t care if I believe it or not. But I’ve never disputed that Christians are harassed, FoG. What I dispute is whether they have more to fear from bigotry than atheists and Wiccans do. Changing the subject and putting words in my mouth will only serve to tarnish your reputation further. -Ben ---
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/123 "2001-03-17T13:27:42Z")
I just want to say that I have been wrong many, many times before on the SDMB and elsewhere. But never have I been **more** proud of being wrong than in the exchange that FoG and Ben are discussing right now. The payoff on that one was so deliciously sweet; I wish I could have seen FoG’s face when matt said he didn’t have a job. And I completely agree with Ben that it’s nothing short of stupefying for FoG to claim, “Here’s some advice–if it’s right, it came from God, but if it’s wrong, um, I made it up.” Not only is that a transparently weak CYA attempt, it shows a great deal of contempt for the people you’re talking to, **and** it shows an attempt at self-aggrandizement by cold-reading someone and trying to pretend a deity is behind it. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 2:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/124 "2001-03-17T14:07:16Z")
PL: It also shows an astonishing lack of respect for God. _That_ is partly why - as I believe I made clear earlier - I said before that FoG has been using the Lord’s name in vain with his postings here under that particular moniker. ---
**Author:** ![Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/df788c/32.png) [@Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/125 "2001-03-17T17:16:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FriendofGod \* > \*\* > I asked you about this at the tail end of another thread (either the original movie one or the other one about Christians getting persecuted), but you must have missed it. \*\* I’ve checked the movie and persecution threads, and while I raised the issue in the movie thread at least twice, I don’t see FoG even acknowledging the question. Does anyone remember the post to which FoG is referring? I’m afraid that thus far, his track record with the truth is far from the best… I did, however, spot this amusing tidbit: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=60286&pagenumber=3](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=60286&pagenumber=3) > [@](#): > > _Originally posted by FriendofGod_\*\* > May I make an honest suggestion? Give up trying to convince Satan. You could lay out the plainest case in the world (which, actually, you’ve already done) and it wouldn’t matter. He _will_ find something in your words to twist, because he does not like your conclusion. I have finally come to the realization that there are a few posters on here who could care less about the truth. They just want to keep the debate rolling, and if twisting someone’s words accomplishes that, they will do it. Thankfully, most people on here want an _honest_ debate. \*\* -Ben ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/126 "2001-03-17T17:36:49Z")
As the one who started the original thread taking you to task for it, I feel I should at least respond to: > [@](#): > > You know what? It finally hit me about a week ago that I could care less if anyone believes Christians are harassed in America today! There are many more important issues I am concerned with. So yes, I believe Christians are harassed in the USA today, and no, I am not going to try to prove to you it’s true, nor do I care if you do or don’t believe it’s true. Dammit, FoG, this is why people get exasperated with you. You said that not only do Christians face more harassment in this society than atheists or Wiccans, you could not believe that anyone would think otherwise. When presented with evidence to the contrary, you simply put your fingers in your ears. It would say a lot for you–and, by extension, for Christianity–if you could admit that your impression was incorrect. Again, put your statement in another context–“I don’t care what anyone says, white people are harrassed in our society! That’s what I believe, and nothing could change my mind!” Is that going to help foster harmony among the races? Your statement above is carefully re-worded. No one is going to argue with you that Christians do sometimes get harrassed. Some white people will be harrassed by some black people. Some heterosexuals will be harrassed by some homosexuals. Yes, some Christians will be harrassed by some non-Christians. That’s not what you claimed before, and that’s not what we’re arguing about. The argument was about who has a harder time in general, and that’s what you refuse to concede that you were wrong about. Re: prophecy–Come to my next International Brotherhood of Magicians meeting, and I guarantee you’ll find plenty of guys who can stack up against your church’s Traveling Prophets. Oh, and the proper Sylvia Browne dodge for your situation would have been, “That message must not have been for you. Is there someone else here who is having trouble at work?” Re: Pat Robertson (I don’t feel like going back to get the quotes)–I’ve consered starting yet another thread on this matter. In my opinion, the best thing Christians could do in this country is to do everything they can to distance themselves from the likes of Fred Phelps, Pat Robertson, the Christian Coalition, etc. Perhaps I’ll do that later today. Dr. J ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/127 "2001-03-17T18:07:20Z")
**Monty** said: > [@](#): > > So, you see, a course of instruction is a catechism. The word is not solely used for Roman Catholic instruction. Ah, def #2 was the only one I’d heard before. Thanks! > [@](#): > > And yet, I study the Scriptures in depth, and come to different conclusions than you do. Perhaps it’s not the Scriptures at fault but the individual? Note that this could mean I’m mistaken, it could mean you’re mistaken, and it could mean that we’re both mistaken. What amazes me is that you refuse to accept that you could possibly be mistaken when you assign to God statements, by your own admission later, he didn’t make. Why do you assume that that I ‘refuse to accept that I could possibly be mistaken’? There are dozens of issues in the Bible that are not 100% set in stone. Many of my friends and I have varied views on them, as I’m sure you do too. It’s possible I’ll learn what is true or not on some of those issues while on earth, but most of them will have to wait for heaven. Why are you making this presumption? > [@](#): > > Since you admittedly don’t know who the spirit moving you is, you can not be sure that you are carrying out the Lord’s work because you don’t know, by your own admission, who’s telling you to do that work. You seem to assume that ‘missing it’ once = missing it throughout my entire life? Why do you think that? No, the Holy Spirit has been my guide since I gave my heart to Christ. Sure I may have missed it a time or two, but thankfully God is merciful to help get me back on track when that happens. > [@](#): > > You claimed that God told you something; therefore, you laid claim to prophesy. Once again, good teaching could help here. In the NT, all Christians can prophesy, but not all Christians are prophets. Two different things. More on this in a moment… By the way, the Prophetic People News list was a good list! You said: > [@](#): > > You claimed to know God’s mind, and thus you were claiming distinguishing characteristic #9 along with the bolded sentence below #10. That means you claimed to be a prophet. Nope, as you can plainly and clearly read, I did _not_ say I thought for sure God was speaking. But even if I had said “I am pretty darn sure this is from God”, why do you insist that that = ‘claiming to be a prophet’? Look, if it’s unclear at all, let me make it clear: I’M NOT one, and never said I was! I’ve already said that and don’t know why I’m bothering to repeat it. Again, more on this in a moment … > [@](#): > > Cite? I know very many non-religious folks who don’t mind religious folks running for office. What those folks object to is those religious folks who state they’ll legislate their religion. That does not mean the non-religious folks object to religious folks en toto. I agree with the above, but I remember in the late 70s and early 80s reading articles both in secular and spiritual publications that argued the case that Christians should ‘focus on evangelism and ministry, not on politics’ and things like that. This was right during the time that Christians were suddenly getting involved in politics in droves. Having said that, I agree that not all nonbelievers feel that way. > [@](#): > > The reason Ben doesn’t believe your assertion is true is that it’s demonstrably false. And I am simply saying I am going to agree to disagree on this very point. You and some other seem convinced it’s false … that’s fine! I have not spent decades documenting what I’m talking about, and I’m not going to start trying to now just to convince all of you because it’s a completely non-compelling issue to me. You think it’s ‘demonstrably false’, I don’t. End of story. **flowbark** … thank you for bringing some reasoned balance and perspective to all this. You made a good point here especially: > [@](#): > > But, hey, that’s only because I don’t run into Charismatic Fundamentalists too often. OTOH, I meet athiests all the time … For FoG, OTOH, I suspect that prophesying, speaking in tongues, witnessing, etc. etc. are commonplace. For me announcing, even tentatively that, “I just got a message from G\*d and it’s for you”, is… well, I’m stunned. That totally makes sense. I can see how this whole realm might seem shocking, or even _bad_ to some people. In fact, it might interest you to know that not all Christians even believe that prophesy is something God is doing in today’s world. Referring back to what I was saying to Monty, I can see how he and _perhaps_ even Ben are genuinely ‘concerned’ that this is a big deal. What admittedly irks me is that there is such a drastic assumption of false motives on Ben’s part. He assumes he knows what he’s talking about when he doesn’t. But then again, as you are saying, I really shouldn’t _expect_ anyone here to be comfortable with the prophetic since it’s not a routine part of your lives. Plus this just occurred to me: a large percentage of the folks on this board don’t believe God exists, and therefore _any_ statement that “God spoke to me” will be seen as false. Hmmmm… > [@](#): > > And some of it may reflect a framework that you take for granted and that others find strange, even potentially dangerous (the doctrine, not you). Things taken for granted are by definition not completely thought out. Exactly. I’m used to this stuff, but it’s blindsiding you guys. I could repeat this all day, but a good scripture study should have preceded any attempt at prophesy on this board, and I obviously question whether I should have ever even brought the subject up even once. **Ben** > [@](#): > > You will make some statement and provide only the tiniest shred of pseudo-evidence, but you won’t admit you’re wrong when there’s a mountain of evidence against you. If you’d just change your mind every once in a while, I and a lot of other people would have a lot more respect for you. Read through C&L and you’ll see plenty of times I backed down on a point. If I truly believe I’m incorrect, I’ll admit it. I don’t believe I am in this case, while you do. You think there’s a mountain of evidence against me, I don’t. Why on earth are you so determined to get bent out of shape over it? Chill out! We disagree. It’s no biggie. It happens. > [@](#): > > The problem is that no matter what I do, you will see my criticisms as rude. Not true. Ben, you are one of a very small number of people on SD that I’ve intentionally ignored at times. I only do that when people go on a personal attack, assume motives, assign blame, and basically act in a judgmental fashion, as you are doing. I don’t want to give any respect or honor to someone behaving that way by responding to their questions and issues. You have set yourself up as judge, jury, and executioner. You are certain you are right, and your presumption of this comes out in your accusations. I’m sorry, I’m not going to try to have a polite conversation with someone who has already made the assumption that I’m a ‘false prophet’, a liar, or worse. Others have raised controversial issues with me in very respectful ways and I have no problem discussing those issues with them. Here’s the essence of what you’re saying: “FoG, you are a false prophet and you are a liar. Care to explain yourself?” Ben, I would hope that if anyone ever attacked you with this kind of tone, that you would respect yourself enough to ignore _them_. I will not honor the presumptiveness and accusatory nature of the above. You _could_ have said something like this, dropping your preconceived notions: “FoG, I have always believed that a prophet had to be 100% accurate to be believed. You were inaccurate in a prophesy, so why should we believe you are a prophet?” I would have responded as I already had, and you could have responded, “Okay, so you don’t equate giving a prophesy with being a prophet. I don’t believe that, can you give me a scripture reference to back it up?” … etc etc. But you intentionally dramatize the discussion by drawing your conclusion before it starts: that I’m a ‘false prophet’. You assume that because I diagree with you on the other issue that I’m a ‘liar’. That’s the reason I ignore you a lot of times Ben: you have proven to me that you are trying to attack me, not have an honest intelligent discussion. > [@](#): > > Anyone looking at my post can tell that I did, in fact, portray pldennison’s remark as coming before matt revealed that you were wrong. Actually, in looking back, you are right. Sorry about that. It was what you _said_ that made it appear that you were trying to sidestep that issue, but as far as your placement of the quotes it was correct. As usual, you have dramatized the issue by calling it an ‘outright lie’. Does it _EVER_ occur to you Ben, _EVER_, that it might just be an honest mistake? Why do you insist on being accusatory? Regarding my not being a prophet: > [@](#): > > As Monty has pointed out, this is simply ridiculous. You claimed to have made prophecies, both to matt and to your Christian friends… As I said earlier in this post, prophesying does not = being a prophet. One of many more reasons I shouldn’t have attempted prophesy without the context of scripture study. Study it in I Cor 12 - 14 and Ephesians 4 if you wish. The Bible distinguishes that _every_ Christian can prophesy, but only certain ones are called to be a “prophet”. > [@](#): > > Let me get this straight: you can’t be a homosexual and a Christian, but you can be a racist and a Christian? Where did you pull this out of?!? You know, this is a perfect example of your tendency to jump to conclusions. You read one paragraph to me and expect me to make the same assumptions you are. Show me the context and I’ll comment. I do not quickly assume things about other people until I have all the facts. Ben here’s the bottom line: if you want to have a discussion with me, I expect you to respect me as a human being, and to cease assuming accusatory things about me that you don’t know are true. If you are willing to do that, we can have a debate. If you aren’t, I will not lose one wink of sleep over ignoring your posts. **pld** … what I said to Ben. It’s the presumption of motives that makes it difficult to discuss anything with a handful of you. Thankfully, most on this board don’t do that. **Monty** … you’re hanging out in bad company, you’re starting to do it too ;). How do you know anything, one way or the other, about my relationship to Christ? He is indeed my best friend in the universe, and will be for all eternity. And thankfully, unlike you guys, God _DOES_ know what’s in my heart. ---
**Author:** ![Ben](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/df788c/32.png) [@Ben](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ben)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/128 "2001-03-17T18:36:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FriendofGod \* > \*\* You assume that because I diagree with you on the other issue that I’m a ‘liar’. \*\* No, I assume that you’re a liar because in your post you made completely false accusations against me, several times, and on that basis claimed I had a general tendency towards dishonesty which you still have not retracted. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Actually, in looking back, you are right. Sorry about that. It was what you _said_ that made it appear that you were trying to sidestep that issue, \*\* But this isn’t true. Check my original argument: “FoG, you delivered a false prophecy. Think of it this way: pldennison has more power of discernment than you do. He knew the prophecy did not come from God, and you- the false prophet in question- did not. I think that if God exists, pldennison was way, way more tuned in to him than you were, and you should have a little more respect for God’s choice of friends.” Clearly what I said didn’t make it appear that I was trying to sidestep the issue, since my entire argument hinged on the fact that pldennison knew your prophecy was false before it was revealed as such, while you didn’t realize it was false until after matt said he was unemployed. We find, then, that even now, when FoG complains that he only made an honest mistake, he can’t be bothered to figure out what the facts are. > [@](#): > > \*\* Does it _EVER_ occur to you Ben, _EVER_, that it might just be an honest mistake? Why do you insist on being accusatory? \*\* Why do _you_ insist on being accusatory? You’ve made an accusation against me which was completely unfounded, and suggested that it points to a general tendency towards dishonesty on my part. And yet, when one looks at what I actually wrote, we see that you construed it in a completely false fashion. Does it ever occur to you, ever, that you should read people’s posts a little more carefully before making accusations? > [@](#): > > \*\* > As I said earlier in this post, prophesying does not = being a prophet. \*\* The source of the confusion is now clear, then. We were using the dictionary definition of the word, while you were using a narrowly-defined meaning valid only within the theology of your specific church. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Where did you pull this out of?!? You know, this is a perfect example of your tendency to jump to conclusions. You read one paragraph to me and expect me to make the same assumptions you are. Show me the context and I’ll comment. I do not quickly assume things about other people until I have all the facts. \*\* Let’s look at the statement I was actually responding to. I presented an apparently racist quote from Robertson, and FoG replied: “Regarding the Pat Robertson quotes … giving your penchant for quoting out of context, I’d have to hear the entire context of his quote about South Africa to even begin to comment. I have no idea what his overall point was and if I agree or disagree. Even if I disagree, why would that not make him a Christian?” My comment, then, was directed to the last sentence: FoG’s apparent statement that even if Robertson’s quote, in context, were as racist as it seemed, that wouldn’t disqualify Robertson from being a Christian. Am I the only one who read FoG’s comment that way? In any event, contrary to FoG’s claims, I was clearly not expecting him to draw the same conclusions from the quote that I did, _since I was referring to FoG’s hypothetical scenario in which the context of the quote would be known._ Again, even upon complaining that I’m taking him to task for an honest mistake, FoG can’t accurately portray what was actually said. If that’s not the result of dishonesty, then it can only result from a total carelessness with the facts, even when he’s making accusations. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Ben here’s the bottom line: if you want to have a discussion with me, I expect you to respect me as a human being, and to cease assuming accusatory things about me that you don’t know are true. If you are willing to do that, we can have a debate. \*\* FoG, here’s the bottom line: if you want to have a discussion with me, I expect you to respect me as a human being, and to cease making accusations against me when you haven’t read carefully enough to know what you’re talking about. -Ben ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/129 "2001-03-17T18:37:54Z")
**Ben** said: > [@](#): > > I’ve checked the movie and persecution threads, and while I raised the issue in the movie thread at least twice, I don’t see FoG even acknowledging the question. I was wrong on which thread it was. Here’s the link if you care to look: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=61396](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=61396) **DoctorJ** said: > [@](#): > > You said that not only do Christians face more harassment in this society than atheists or Wiccans, you could not believe that anyone would think otherwise. When presented with evidence to the contrary, you simply put your fingers in your ears. I _do_ remember what you’re talking about, and I think I responded somewhere in your thread (or perhaps the original one) that it was eye opening to see the way atheists and Wiccans see things, which, indeed, it was. I don’t think that qualifies as ‘putting my fingers in my ears’ ;). I’ve never done a study of who faces _more_ harassment, and again, it’s not a huge issue to me. I had thought that the idea that atheists/Wiccans would be attacked _more_ than Christians was ridiculous, but as I said, I can see how people would see things differently. It was an interesting debate. Regarding my statement being ‘carefully reworded’, it’s more like ‘I didn’t care about the topic and didn’t really think about giving a detailed description of it’. It’s not the vast right wing conspiracy striking again, I promise ;). ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/130 "2001-03-17T19:52:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FriendofGod \* > **A prophet in the NT can miss God completely and still be a valid prophet… Having said that, obviously an NT prophet has to be accurate the vast majority of the time if they hope to have an effective ministry! I’ve seen some that are fairly marginal, and I’ve seen a couple that are accurate over 95% of the time!** It seems to me that the Almighty would have a 100% success rate. It seems to me that the Almighty could do a better job of selecting prophets. In fact, I keep hearing that the Almighty is incapable of error, and yet, according to you, He can’t find a person capable of relaying simple messages! NASA has stricter standards for its manned space flights. \*\* > [@](#): > > One of my all time favorite prophet stories is from the early 80s when a prophet came to our church and prophesied one person at a time to each person in one of the bible studies in our church (about 30 or so people). He was accurate with each one, except for two people. These two people are sisters and were very good friends of mine at the time. The guy got them swapped!\*\* Did you witness this yourself or was it only hearsay? Besides, once again, I have to ask how it is that God could not pick someone who could tell the difference between two sisters? Even if they were identical twins, God knows which is which, right? > [@](#): > > **Even if it weren’t true, if Pat Robertson were elected President, it would be his business who he wanted for key positions. If he wants all Christians and thinks that’s best for the country, that’s what he should do!** No, it would be OUR business. The President leads the country with OUR approval. Which is why Robertson will never be elected President. There are far too many non-Christians and reasonable Christians who would never vote for him. > [@](#): > > **You know what? It finally hit me about a week ago that I could care less if anyone believes Christians are harassed in America today!** You mean “could NOT care less.” If you could care less, it means you DO care, even if only a little bit. > [@](#): > > **There are many more important issues I am concerned with. So yes, I believe Christians are harassed in the USA today, and no, I am not going to try to prove to you it’s true, nor do I care if you do or don’t believe it’s true.** Typical. Caught making a claim you cannot prove, you announce that it’s not important enough to prove. If a claim is important enough to make, it’s important enough to prove. And I haven’t even got to the reply you made to me. Oh, BOY, are you gonna get it! ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/131 "2001-03-17T20:40:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FriendofGod \* > \*\*So Jesus says here (and elsewhere) that the way to eternal life is love God with everything in you and love everyone around you as you love yourself! Yet in chapter 14 He says you have to _hate_ those closest to you to follow Him! Doesn’t seem to jibe does it? \*\* No, it doesn’t. And you didn’t make it jibe. It doesn’t fit any more than a size 6 shoe would fit on a size 10 foot! > [@](#): > > **In the context of Jesus’ overall message, I take the earlier passage to mean this: that your love and devotion and commitment to God are so total and complete, that the _DISTANCE_ between your love for Him and your love for your family is as _LONG_ as the distance between two people who hate each other.** Assume you could actually measure these distances in terms of _cupids_. Your hate for a person is equal to negative-five cupids; your love for your family is equal to five cupids; and your love for God is equal to ten cupids. So you love God more than your own family, twice as much, in fact. No wonder you are willing to abandon them, if they stand in your way, in order to get to Heaven. Charming. When or if you get married, will you expect her to love you more than her own family, to abandon them if they stand in the way of your marriage? That’s what God is asking of you, to abandon anyone who stands between you and Him. > [@](#): > > **Anyway, I hope that gives you something to chew on.** And spit out. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/132 "2001-03-17T20:52:33Z")
[http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=63901](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=63901) ---
**Author:** ![jab1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ee7513/32.png) [@jab1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jab1)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2001, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/133 "2001-03-17T21:15:19Z")
I can’t post on the relevant thread since it’s now closed, so I’ll answer it here: First, a pre-frontal lobotomy. Then… ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2001, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/134 "2001-03-18T01:55:22Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by **FriendofGod** _ > > Ben, you are one of a very small number of people on SD that I’ve intentionally ignored at times. I only do that when people go on a **personal attack, assume motives, assign blame, and basically act in a judgmental fashion** , as you are doing. I don’t want to give any respect or honor to someone behaving that way by responding to their questions and issues. (Emphasis mine) Funny, but that’s exactly what _you_ were doing which caused us to have words and you to start ignoring me way back when. :rolleyes: Esprix ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2001, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/135 "2001-03-18T02:48:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FriendofGod \* > Ah, def #2 was the only one I’d heard before. Thanks! You’re welcome. Now be so kind as to start using a dictionary. You can find one quite easily online at [http://www.dictionary.com](http://www.dictionary.com) > [@](#): > > Why do you assume that that I ‘refuse to accept that I could possibly be mistaken’? Because of the evidence of your backpedalling whenever you’re proven wrong. > [@](#): > > There are dozens of issues in the Bible that are not 100% set in stone. Amazing. A fundie asserts that the Bible is not 100% inerrant. > [@](#): > > Many of my friends and I have varied views on them, as I’m sure you do too. The teaching I’ve gleaned from the Scriptures is a lot less judmental than that you’ve evidently gotten from the same source. I’m quite happy that my views on Scripture do not approach yours. > [@](#): > > It’s possible I’ll learn what is true or not on some of those issues while on earth, but most of them will have to wait for heaven. Why are you making this presumption? Doesn’t that depend on the spirit telling you what’s true or not? As we’ve seen, you’ve misidentified that spirit at least once. And it’s not a presumption. I observed, then reported the observation, and then reported my conclusion. > [@](#): > > You seem to assume that ‘missing it’ once = missing it throughout my entire life? Why do you think that? No, the Holy Spirit has been my guide since I gave my heart to Christ. Sure I may have missed it a time or two, but thankfully God is merciful to help get me back on track when that happens. Interesting that the Scriptures give the exact opposite conclusion on the issue of prophecy, as has been pointed out to you already. > [@](#): > > Once again, good teaching could help here. In the NT, all Christians can prophesy, but not all Christians are prophets. Two different things. More on this in a moment… No. Only those who prophesy are prophets and thus only prophets prophesy, q.e.d. Now those who say they prophesy when they don’t are stating a falsehood. Don’t the Scriptures have something to say about that? > [@](#): > > By the way, the Prophetic People News list was a good list! Well, I suppose if you believe in that stuff. Since I don’t believe that guy’s getting any more prophecies than you did from God, I’ll leave it at that. > [@](#): > > Nope, as you can plainly and clearly read, I did _not_ say I thought for sure God was speaking. But even if I had said “I am pretty darn sure this is from God”, why do you insist that that = ‘claiming to be a prophet’? Look, if it’s unclear at all, let me make it clear: I’M NOT one, and never said I was! I’ve already said that and don’t know why I’m bothering to repeat it. Again, more on this in a moment … In the World of the Real, those who claim that God told them something and here it is, well, they’re claiming prophetic ability. Please see your denomination’s list above. > [@](#): > > …I remember in the late 70s and early 80s reading articles both in secular and spiritual publications that argued the case that Christians should ‘focus on evangelism and ministry, not on politics’ and things like that. Cites, please? > [@](#): > > This was right during the time that Christians were suddenly getting involved in politics in droves. You remember something from about 2000 years ago? I’m impressed! > [@](#): > > Having said that, I agree that not all nonbelievers feel that way. Cool. Now how about retracting your erroneous dual assertion about Christians being a persecuted minority in the United States of America in 2001? > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > The reason Ben doesn’t believe your assertion is true is that it’s demonstrably false. > > And I am simply saying I am going to agree to disagree on this very point. Gee, I bet your test papers in school are very entertaining to the teachers. > [@](#): > > You and some other seem convinced it’s false … that’s fine! Funny thing about me and some others…we kind of like evidence on certain things. The evidence against your assertion removes any doubt as to its falsity. > [@](#): > > I have not spent decades documenting what I’m talking about, Since your assertion is obviously and demonstrably false, it doesn’t matter how long you spent _attempting_ to document it, since there’s no evidence in favour of it! > [@](#): > > and I’m not going to start trying to now just to convince all of you because it’s a completely non-compelling issue to me. Are you now admitting here that you basically pulled that assertion out of thin air? > [@](#): > > You think it’s ‘demonstrably false’, I don’t. No. I know it’s demonstraby false. You have faith it isn’t. Two completely different issues. > [@](#): > > End of story. Are you familiar with the myth, _Pandora’s Box_? It’s by no means the end of the story. > [@](#): > > **flowbark** … thank you for bringing some reasoned balance and perspective to all this. {Ahem!} Neither Ben nor I was rude to you; however, you have been rude to quite a few folks. I guess that’s your definition of balance and perspective. > [@](#): > > That totally makes sense. I can see how this whole realm might seem shocking, or even _bad_ to some people. In fact, it might interest you to know that not all Christians even believe that prophesy is something God is doing in today’s world. Well, since I’m an LDS Christian, the idea of continuing prophecy doesn’t shock me. I’ve just seen zero evidence that you have that gift. On the other hand, I have seen the evidence that you don’t. > [@](#): > > What admittedly irks me is that there is such a drastic assumption of false motives on Ben’s part. He assumes he knows what he’s talking about when he doesn’t. Please substitute “FoG” for “Ben” and you’ll see how you come off on this board. > [@](#): > > But then again, as you are saying, I really shouldn’t _expect_ anyone here to be comfortable with the prophetic since it’s not a routine part of your lives. Don’t know too much about the LDS either, hey? > [@](#): > > Plus this just occurred to me: a large percentage of the folks on this board don’t believe God exists, and therefore _any_ statement that “God spoke to me” will be seen as false. Hmmmm… “A large percentage?” I sure hope that’s not another prophecy! Exactly what are the raw numbers of believers in God and non-believers of God on this board and the percentage breakdown, please? > [@](#): > > I could repeat this all day, but a good scripture study should have preceded any attempt at prophesy on this board, and I obviously question whether I should have ever even brought the subject up even once. So you’re saying, now, that you really did attempt to prophesy? A good scripture study is, IMHO, definitely something you have yet to recieve, FoG. > [@](#): > > Here’s the essence of what you’re saying: "FoG, you are a false prophet and you are a liar. No, that’s what the Scriptures say, and Ben pointed that out. > [@](#): > > Care to explain yourself?" How about it? Care to explain yourself? > [@](#): > > As I said earlier in this post, prophesying does not = being a prophet. Incorrect, as that is the very function of a prophet. > [@](#): > > One of many more reasons I shouldn’t have attempted prophesy without the context of scripture study. Study it in I Cor 12 - 14 and Ephesians 4 if you wish. The Bible distinguishes that _every_ Christian can prophesy, but only certain ones are called to be a “prophet”. And those who are called to be such are the ones who prophesy. Evidently, by your own admission, that was not you and therefore you did not prophesy although you so attempted. Silly me, I thought it was God who decided who received what Gift of the Spirit, not Man. > [@](#): > > **Monty** … you’re hanging out in bad company, you’re starting to do it too ;). I’m quite pleased with the very good company I appear to be hanging out in. They certainly evidence more knowledge of the Scriptures, and their application, than you have. > [@](#): > > How do you know anything, one way or the other, about my relationship to Christ? By what comes out of your mouth, of course. I seem to recall that Jesus had something to say on that score. > [@](#): > > He is indeed my best friend in the universe, and will be for all eternity. Gee, I wonder how he feels about people speaking for Him with words He didn’t tell them to say? Oops! That’s right; He already covered false prophets in the Scriptures. > [@](#): > > And thankfully, unlike you guys, God _DOES_ know what’s in my heart. Please see above about Jesus saying something about what comes out of one’s mouth. ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2001, 6:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/136 "2001-03-18T06:06:48Z")
I just have a few questions, and I’ll try to be polite as possible: (1) If you weren’t “prophesying,” per se, what WERE you doing? What should we call it? (2) Who do you attribute as the ULTIMATE source of your, shall we say, apprehension about matt? If not God, then you? Or was it Satan? (3) If I understand you correctly, any Christian can prophesy, but not all who prophesy are prophets, yes? What would I call a prophesying Christian, if not a prophet? (4) Can non-Christians prophesy? If so, do they do it through some means other than the Holy Spirit? Can they be right? (5) How does one distinguish between a plain ole vanilla “prediction” (such as “Illinois is going to win the NCAA Tournament”) and a _bona fide_ prophecy? If truth is the only criterion, then can’t we call the Psychic Friends Network a conglomeration of prophets, as long as they’re right? Would I be a prophet if Illinois does indeed win the tournament, or just a lucky guesser? (6) IIRC, Satan can send prophecies, too. How does one tell if a prophecy is from Satan? If it’s wrong? Is he the only one that can cause a prediction to be wrong, or can a prediction be wrong without supernatural influence? (7) To anyone–I’ve been using “prophesy” as a verb, and “prophecy” as a noun. Is this right, or is it like a “depends on which side of The Pond” you’re on deal, or are they interchangeable? Sorry to inundate you with questions, but I keep getting mixed signals as to what you think causes prophesy, what prophesy is, what it isn’t, who can do it, etc. Quix ---
**Author:** ![FriendofGod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ee7513/32.png) [@FriendofGod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendofGod)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2001, 8:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/137 "2001-03-18T08:46:04Z")
**Ben** … in keeping with what I’ve said previously, I will only respond to certain parts of your post. Regarding prophesy not being equal to giving a prophesy: > [@](#): > > The source of the confusion is now clear, then. We were using the dictionary definition of the word, while you were using a narrowly-defined meaning valid only within the theology of your specific church. And this is all I ask … giving me the benefit of the doubt instead of assuming you know what’s in my heart. To further expand this point, it’s not confined to prophesy only. The Bible also makes it clear that: All Christians can evangelize, But not all Christians are Evangelists. All Christians can teach, But not all Christians are Teachers. All Christians can act in a pastoral fashion toward someone, But not all Christians are Pastors. And, All Christians can prophesy, But not all Christians are Prophets. Look at it in the natural world and you can see the same principle. Anyone can hammer nails, but not everyone is a Carpenter. Anyone can sing (good or bad), but not everyone is a Singer. Anyone can write, but not everyone is a Writer. Anyway, I hope that point is cleared up now. As for the Pat Robertson issue: what you seem to be saying now is – whether he was being racist or not, the real question is: can you be a racist and a Christian? Correct me if I’m wrong. You compared this earlier to the issue of: can you be a homosexual and a Christian. Here’s the very simple answer: it’s like any other sin. Literally you can fill in the blank with racism, homosexuality, hatred, promiscuity, etc. Very simply: no, you cannot be a Christian and live a LIFESTYLE of sin, whatever that sin is. In the context of racism, for example, you cannot be a KKK leader and a Christian: they are contradictory! Similarly, you can’t be a leader of a hate group and be a Christian, etc etc. On the flip side, every Christian _struggles_ with certain sins. They are different for different people. For some it might be racism. For others it might be homosexuality, or hatred, or anger, or whatever. But it’s a different context. A Christian doesn’t say, “I can be a Christian and a racist”. A Christian says, “I have a sin of racism and I want God to change me and cleanse me of this sin”. It’s all about what’s in the heart. Saying you can be Christian and racist simultaneously is like saying you can be male and female simultaneously. It’s a contradiction. But a particular Christian might struggle with the sin of racism, which is different from saying they live a _lifestyle_ of racism with no desire to change. One final comment Ben: regardless of your tone and what you have or haven’t said in previous posts, I realized that I have no right to be rude and sarcastic to you any more than you do to me. I apologize for the ‘Sherlock’ comment and any other that were less than polite. …onward… **jab1** said: > [@](#): > > It seems to me that the Almighty would have a 100% success rate. It seems to me that the Almighty could do a better job of selecting prophets. In fact, I keep hearing that the Almighty is incapable of error, and yet, according to you, He can’t find a person capable of relaying simple messages! NASA has stricter standards for its manned space flights. The Almighty _DOES_ have a 100% success rate. The only problem is, He’s only come to earth once, and even then for only 33 years. Jesus had a 100% success rate. Today, he uses flawed human beings, who do _not_ have a 100% success rate. It’s not God who’s at fault, it’s us. > [@](#): > > Did you witness this yourself or was it only hearsay? Besides, once again, I have to ask how it is that God could not pick someone who could tell the difference between two sisters? Even if they were identical twins, God knows which is which, right? Unfortunately I wasn’t there that night, but everyone was talking about it. I heard it directly from one of the two sisters involved. They had a good sense of humor about it, as did everyone. Again, of course _God_ could pick them out. It was the _prophet_ who got his wires crossed, not God. > [@](#): > > No, it would be OUR business. The President leads the country with OUR approval. Which is why Robertson will never be elected President. There are far too many non-Christians and reasonable Christians who would never vote for him. That may very well be. But … if Al Gore had won the election, for example, I would have fully expected him to appoint liberal Democrats who want to push his agenda to the cabinet. I expected Bush to appoint conservative Republicans, which he did. If Pat Robertson were elected, I would expect him to appoint Christians, or at least those who share Judeo Christian beliefs. > [@](#): > > Typical. Caught making a claim you cannot prove, you announce that it’s not important enough to prove. If a claim is important enough to make, it’s important enough to prove. In all complete honesty … it amazes me that you and so many others keep harping on this. Why on earth is it oh so very important to you? > [@](#): > > So you love God more than your own family, twice as much, in fact. No wonder you are willing to abandon them, if they stand in your way, in order to get to Heaven. Charming. You know what? The way these scriptures play out in _real_ _life_, I’ve never seen a situation where a Christian had to “abandon his family” (not saying it’s never happened, just that I’ve never seen or heard of it). The way I’ve seen it work in real life is a Christian wife/husband/son/daughter or whatever refuses to give up their faith to satisfy their relatives, and one of three things happen: 1) the other relatives keep a grudging respect for the person and drop their objection, 2) observing the changed life affects the relative so much that they come to faith themselves, or 3) the _relative_ rejects the believer and abandons _them_. Off the top of my head, I can think of: 1. A wife who refused to give up her faith despite her husband’s strong objections, and after seven years the husband came to Christ himself 2. A daughter who refused to give up her faith and was disowned by her parents for it 3. A wife who refused to give up her faith despite her husband’s strong objections, whose husband simply lives with it Actually I know dozens of couples in the #3 situation. The point is not abandoning your family, the point is your love for God has to come first. If a relative chooses to walk away because of it, you aren’t to compromise to make them feel comfortable. And it’s actually more than that … it’s about priorities. I’m sure you’ve heard this a hundred times, but it’s God first, family second, career third. **Monty** responded to my question … > [@](#): > > Why do you assume that that I ‘refuse to accept that I could possibly be mistaken’? …with this answer: > [@](#): > > Because of the evidence of your backpedalling whenever you’re proven wrong. If I’m _TRULY_ proven wrong, sure I’ll admit it. I will not, however, ‘admit’ I’m wrong if I know that I’m not. Just because I can’t and don’t have the desire to prove it doesn’t mean it’s not true! This is giving me more and more insight into how atheists think. Do you guys really think like this on _all_ issues? In other words, many of you seem to have a particular standard for truth: \>\> If it can’t be proven to be true, it’s false. \<\< Not “it might be false” or “it could be true or false”, just “it’s false, period”. To me, this is a very blind standard. Is this at the root of why some of you don’t believe in God? Ie, do you think that since you can’t prove He exists, He doesn’t exist? > [@](#): > > Amazing. A fundie asserts that the Bible is not 100% inerrant. No, you misunderstand. The Bible is 100% inerrant. When I say, “There are dozens of issues in the Bible that are not 100% set in stone”, what I mean is that there are many issues where the Bible can be viewed in different ways. Classic example is the timing of the rapture, but there are many others. > [@](#): > > …Only those who prophesy are prophets and thus only prophets prophesy… I’ve addressed this earlier in this post. If you disagree, that’s fine, but you now know where I’m coming from on this issue. As for ‘cites’ from the late 70s / early 80s when Christians were getting into politics … you’re kidding, right? You think I have a stack of Time magazines here that I’ve kept around for 20 years just so I could answer this question? Be reasonable. I recall in various Christian and secular publications (probably Time/Newsweek and Charisma or similar pubs) the raging debate over whether Christians should be involved in politics. For the most part this debate seems to have subsided nowadays. > [@](#): > > Now how about retracting your erroneous dual assertion about Christians being a persecuted minority in the United States of America in 2001? I really, really, really want to know: why on earth do you care so much that I say that? I hate to break it to you, but you will never hear me say that because it would be a blatant lie, so give it up (although, as I said in the numerous earlier threads, I would replace the word ‘persecuted’ with ‘harassed’). > [@](#): > > Since your assertion is obviously and demonstrably false, it doesn’t matter how long you spent attempting to document it, since there’s no evidence in favour of it! I again refer you to my earlier comment. Just to be sure I understand you: are you saying that if you haven’t seen evidence for a particular claim, it’s an untrue claim? > [@](#): > > Are you now admitting here that you basically pulled that assertion out of thin air? Nope. I pulled it out of what I’ve seen in the media over the years. Not a research project, just living life and observing things. > [@](#): > > No. I know it’s demonstraby false. You have faith it isn’t. Two completely different issues. Again, I find it fascinating that you seem to think that if _you_ haven’t seen evidence for a claim, the claim is false. Not it _might_ be false, it’s just false. And no, I don’t have “faith” it isn’t, I’ve _seen_ what I’m talking about, so I’d be acting dishonestly toward myself if I were to say I haven’t seen it. > [@](#): > > Neither Ben nor I was rude to you; however, you have been rude to quite a few folks. I guess that’s your definition of balance and perspective. No, in fact you and Ben were both quite rude, specifically by presuming motives on my part and in hurtling accusations my way. Unfortunately, I _was_ in fact rude back toward Ben at the very least on a couple of occasions, and if I was rude toward you as well, I apologize (I have not gone back and re-read my responses to you). > [@](#): > > “A large percentage?” I sure hope that’s not another prophecy! Exactly what are the raw numbers of believers in God and non-believers of God on this board and the percentage breakdown, please? Well, that’s just the impression I’ve had since being here. I haven’t seen droves of people here who profess devotion to God, although there are obviously some (ie, Polycarp, etc). Maybe there are more here than I realize. > [@](#): > > So you’re saying, now, that you really did attempt to prophesy? _Attempt_ to yeah … _succeeded_, no. It wasn’t a word from the Lord, it was just me. As for your comments on prophesy, I’m curious if my illustration earlier in this post helps you to better see where I’m coming from. If you end up disagreeing that’s fine, but you really need to drop the accusatory tone. **quixotic78** has seven questions! I love lists of questions! And by the way you were very nice in the way you asked them. Here we go: > [@](#): > > (1) If you weren’t “prophesying,” per se, what WERE you doing? What should we call it? _Attempting_ to prophesy, and failing pretty badly ;). > [@](#): > > (2) Who do you attribute as the ULTIMATE source of your, shall we say, apprehension about matt? If not God, then you? Or was it Satan? It was me, not God or Satan. I was in what Christians call ‘the flesh’ … ie, I was operating out of personal concern rather than the leading of the Holy Spirit, which obviously doesn’t work! > [@](#): > > (3) If I understand you correctly, any Christian can prophesy, but not all who prophesy are prophets, yes? What would I call a prophesying Christian, if not a prophet? This may sound silly, but I’d call them a Christian who happens to be prophesying at the moment. Just like if I saw a Christian reading a Bible, I’d call that a Christian who happens to be reading his Bible at the moment. Here’s another illustration that may help in all this. Let’s take Bible teaching. In small group Bible studies, many times people who have _never_ taught the Bible to a group are asked to take a turn teaching the group. This does not mean they are a “Teacher” (with a capital “T” - ie, the _office_ of Teacher), but they are simply a Christian who is teaching. Does that help? > [@](#): > > (4) Can non-Christians prophesy? If so, do they do it through some means other than the Holy Spirit? Can they be right? Great question, and my answer may surprise you. While I wouldn’t use the term ‘prophesy’ per-se in this context, my answer is yes … non-Christians _can_ operate under demonic influences to do many supernatural things, including a form of prophesy. But satan’s version is always a cheap counterfeit of God’s. One of the best examples of what I mean is from the book of Exodus. Moses throws down his staff and God miraculously turns it into a snake. Well, several Egyptian magicians step up and essentially say, “We can do that too!” They throw down their staffs and _they_ become snakes too! (Exod 7:10-13) But then Moses’ snake _EATS_ the other snakes! It perfectly illustrates this point: satan _does_ have supernatural power, but it’s a cheap counterfeit that can easily be overrun by God’s power. I believe that while many fortune tellers and so-called ‘psychics’ use very _natural_ magician-type tricks, I also believe there are some that _legitimately_ exhibit demonic supernatural power. And yes, they can sometimes be correct. I don’t claim to know who’s who, but I just stay away from all of it. If you dabble in satan’s brand of miracles, they will bite you back at a later date in some form or fashion. > [@](#): > > (5) How does one distinguish between a plain ole vanilla “prediction” (such as “Illinois is going to win the NCAA Tournament”) and a bona fide prophecy? If truth is the only criterion, then can’t we call the Psychic Friends Network a conglomeration of prophets, as long as they’re right? Would I be a prophet if Illinois does indeed win the tournament, or just a lucky guesser? Another good question. I love these questions! The answer is very simple: a prophesy is something that comes directly from God through a person to bring encouragement, comfort, and sometimes challenge. I’ve never seen a prophesy along the lines of ‘such and so will win the lottery’. That’s more of a magic-trick type thing, and God doesn’t do that. He speaks through people, according to I Corinthians 14, for one purpose only: to encourage, edify, uplift, etc. So truth isn’t the only criterion. To take your three examples: 1. Person A predicts that Illinois wins the tournament, and they do. That’s just a lucky guess. 2. Person B hears a word of prophesy from the Lord and gives it to the person it’s directed to. That’s a prophesy. 3. Person C works for the Psychic Friends Network and sees future events via demonic influence. That’s satan’s cheap counterfeit of prophesy. One more thing on the psychic thing: have you noticed on all the ads that the focus is always on _exposing_ bad things about people? That is _never_ how God operates today in prophesy! I’ve never seen a prophesy that was designed to expose or embarrass someone. Again, the psychic thing is the counterfeit. While they might be accurate at times, the spirit behind it is evil and designed to steal, kill, and destroy people. > [@](#): > > (6) IIRC, Satan can send prophecies, too. How does one tell if a prophecy is from Satan? If it’s wrong? Is he the only one that can cause a prediction to be wrong, or can a prediction be wrong without supernatural influence? Yet another great question. It’s all about context and what you’re asking for. If you go to the Psychic Friends Network and get an accurate foretelling of the future, you are dabbling in satan’s realm. If you go to a Godly Bible believing church and get a prophesy from a believer, you are still responsible for careful discernment but the likelihood that the word is from satan is slim to none. In this environment, you are dealing with people who _want_ to hear God and encouarge and bless people. The Bible says that if you ask God for bread, He wont give you a stone. If you want to hear from God, he’s not going to send you satan to confuse you. If however, you dabble in satan’s realm, you’re asking for trouble. Hope that helps! > [@](#): > > (7) To anyone–I’ve been using “prophesy” as a verb, and “prophecy” as a noun. Is this right, or is it like a “depends on which side of The Pond” you’re on deal, or are they interchangeable? I agree with your usage. Prophecy is … well, for lack of a better word a “thing” you can choose to participate in. And the word ‘prophesy’ is the verb, ie when someone chooses to prophesy over someone. > [@](#): > > Sorry to inundate you with questions, but I keep getting mixed signals as to what you think causes prophesy, what prophesy is, what it isn’t, who can do it, etc. Well I hope what I said helped. Feel free to ask more if what I said didn’t fully explain anything. And for the record, I have no problem if you disagree with me as long as you do so respectfully! Thanks again for the questions. ---
**Author:** ![Esprix](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/esprix/32/7899_2.png) [@Esprix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Esprix)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2001, 9:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/138 "2001-03-18T09:50:53Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by **FriendofGod** _ > > … no, you cannot be a Christian and live a LIFESTYLE of sin, whatever that sin is… A Christian doesn’t say, “I can be a Christian and a racist”. A Christian says, “I have a sin of racism and I want God to change me and cleanse me of this sin”. It’s all about what’s in the heart. And once again you claim to be the one that knows what’s in other people’s hearts, and all about their relationship with God and Jesus Christ. I find that particularly droll coming from a guy who got all riled up when he felt other people presumed to know what was in his heart. :rolleyes: Why do I bother? Esprix ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2001, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/139 "2001-03-18T13:54:10Z")
F.O.G. What about prophesies that come from heaven but are contrary to your views? The Virgin Mary appeared at Fatima Portugal in 1917 giving accurate predictions of the future and confirming Catholic doctrine. Does this not prove Catholicism correct and your religious views are as Pope JP2 has stated “gravely deficient”? You may claim that the Fatima apparitions come from Satan but this is impossible since the Church has confirmed they are legitimate, and the Catholic church is incapable of error. Why do you insist on endangering your soul by embracing false doctrine? There is only one TRUE FAITH and sadly yours is not it. I beg you come home to true faith! ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2001, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069/140 "2001-03-18T16:06:25Z")
Once again, FoG mis-uses analogy. If a person prophecises, he is a prophet. If a person hits a nail with a hammer, indeed he is not a carpenter, but he is most assuredly a hammerer. The only qualification to become a prophet is to tell prophesies. It doesn’t matter how often you do it, how you do it, or where the prophesy comes from. Don’t try to sell us on the idea that, if the “prophesy” was true, it must come from God, and if it wasn’t true it didn’t qualify as “prophesy” but was just a bad guess on your part, once again putting your god in a “heads I win-tails you lose” situation. Nobody here is buying it. You tried to sell yourself as a prophet, and failed miserably. [Edited by Czarcasm on 03-18-2001 at 10:11 AM] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/yet-another-movie-that-might-change-your-life-or-at-least-make-you-think/57069.md?page=8)