[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by OBW

Your example was to imply that Baptists churches are effectively like Westboro.

Well, no, because if we examine my statement more closely (emphasis mine):

You mean like westboro baptist or some others i can think of?

I was clearly referring to westboro or some others. How can you then say I implied "all baptist churches are like westboro". You can't understand basic English it would seem. I said nothing of the sort, because I think it is common knowledge, even in the Recovery, that there are good baptist churches and bad ones. My post was clearly in reference to the westboro and some other churches that use the Baptist name.

I was balancing Arons post where he did not put any qualifiers on the word Baptist e.g. "find me a good Baptist church". He only said:

Give me a Baptist church; at least the good news is preserved there.

Some new comers to this forum are seeking a church and we would not want them to think that all baptist churches are good just because they are baptist.

Originally Posted by OBW

While not irrelevant, the point aron made was not to state that anyone was like Pol Pot, but to indicate a clear comparison/trend of bad to worse with the worse pointing at the bad of the former.

Originally Posted by OBW

aron did not say the "Recovery" is like Pol Pot other than to suggest that it was part of a downward trend in terms of the very things that it trumpets as its foundational traits. Primarily unity and stance for oneness. Lots of talk. Less reality of it than what they came from.

I think some examples like Pol Pot or Hitler are so extreme that it does not matter whether one meant it as a trend or not.

In the following statement, Aron said the Recovery was actually a charnel house, a killing field. He did not even use the work "like" or "heading in the direction of" to make a comparative or metaphorical statement.
He said:

Or Pol Pot replacing Prince Sihanouk, who was admittedly corrupt and a poor ruler. But the "new and improved" was actually a charnel house, a killing field.


When he said Watchman Nee's statements reminded him of Marx or Pol Pot, that was essentially saying that Watchman Nee is like Marx or Pol Pot.

Originally Posted by OBW

It could be that you really just don't understand how different the two are, or you are willful in it and know how wrong it is. In the first, it establishes that you are out of your depth. Playing Chess with a Checkers mentality. Alternately you are just wandering through the forum dropping nonsense cloaked in the terminology of intelligence to befuddle those who have not had a chance to think about it yet.

It's time for an English comprehension lesson. You don't seem to understand the difference between these statements:

"like westboro baptist or some others" - this means some baptist churches, not all (as you are saying).

"But the "new and improved" was actually a charnel house, a killing field." - this is not a statement which implies a trend. This is a blatant comparison of the Recovery with a mass murderer. But even to say that the trend of the Recovery is towards Pol Pot, is bad enough!

I don't think my statement that some baptist churches are like westboro is nonsense at all. That would be useful information to know for a newcomer who does not know much about baptist churches and how vastly different they can be.

However I think Arons statement of saying the Recovery is actually a killing field is far worse and utter nonsense.