Replies

"an article from"
I believe I said FROM - not ABOUT. Please read more carefully.

I didn't want it to come to this, but you called the play. I wrote the following to you: "The article isn't about a theologian nor was it written by a theologian; it's about Benny Hinn." The phrase "nor was it written by a theologian" responds precisely to what you wrote, to wit, that the article was "from a theologian", implying that you thought that a theologian wrote it, which is not the case. The beginning phrase of my sentence, "isn't about a theologian", was put in simply to forestall any additional confusion that you might develop.

The next four paragraphs of your response are essentially asking me how I could possibly know that Hinn is a fraud. If you would read the article, you'd know. But since you refuse to read the article, thus insulating yourself from reading any actual empirical evidence of Hinn's perfidy, it's awfully strange for you to complain about lack of evidence.

And .. don't be disparaging my character by saying "I thought a 'true Christian'" - when I have no idea whether you are a Christian or not .. which makes your statement way out of line. A "true Christian" is anyone who has received Jesus as their Savior and Lord. But - not one Christian is TRUER than another.

You've become defensive. Nothing I wrote to you disparages you or your faith in any way, as I believe any objective reader of my posts on this thread will attest. I don't play the game of character assassination. Nor did I say anything about one Christian being any truer than another. That's your invention, not my writing.

Healing comes by faith. If you don't believe me .. search it out in the Bible for yourself .. Jesus must have said it a thousand times while he walked on the earth ("your faith has made you whole"). You may not think that what Benny Hinn does is faith - but the music and all the other stuff is just to get people to operate in faith - as soon as they do - they will get healed (I've seen it happen time after time). If you don't understand how that operates - I can't help you. But to besmirch a person because he APPEARS to be doing something you don't like .. while supplying NO EVIDENCE OF SUBSTANCE OF YOUR CHARGES AGAINST HIM .. I think you need to do some more research.

Again, since you won't read the article, you're completely clueless as regards the question of evidence of Hinn's villainy. It doesn't help your argument for you to accuse me of having no evidence while you yourself have admitted that you're simply refusing to look at any of the evidence (because you refuse to read the article).

I'll repeat: closing your eyes to evidence doesn't make the evidence go away—it just insures that you won't see the evidence. If it's your aim not to see the evidence, you're succeeding. But if it's your aim to come to an evidence-based conclusion about Benny Hinn's behavior, it would behoove you to at least review the evidence which strongly suggests that that behavior is reprehensible.

On the dwindling chance that you're going to decide to actually open your eyes and examine the evidence (rather than continue to ask where it is), I'm again posting the link to the article:

Benny Hinn: Healer or Hypnotist?