From who’s perspective?
I doubt the Pharisees thought Jesus’ rebukes of them were very “LOVING.”
Yet, they were precisely the most loving thing GOD HIMSELF could deliver to them.
Frankly, OPREV, you seem to have stated outright a notion Quix seems to implicitly convey: that if you are a provocative and upsetting enough in your statements that you anger people, than you must be doing something right.
It’s true that sometimes the truth is very upsetting, but stirring anger is hardly a good indicator that you’ve just said something correct. Jesus upset the Pharisees because he made them realize that they weren’t acting out of faithfulness, and that was a truth they weren’t wanting to face.
OPREV, you’ve elicited a bold-faced, all-caps, large-typed, multi-colored string of condemnation and references to demonic forces. But just because Quix thinks you’re wrong and you’ve elicited such a response, doesn’t mean you’re right. President Obama sure enrages a lot of conservatives, but that doesn’t mean he’s right.
Quix, Jesus did show righteous fury in the temple. But what provoked both good and evil from those who witnessed him was the content of his words. If you provoke people because of your damning word choice and garish fonts, do you think that really says anything positive about your message? I could log onto Free Republic and just call everyone a bunch of names and get myself zotted. Does that mean I’m right? The Democratic Underground is full of hateful, angry writing, and people to cheer it on. Haven’t you ever heard the crowd of cheers from the audiences at ACORN rallies?
Let the content of your arguments sway people, not your provocative style.