You mean that the OrthodoPresbyterian C (OPC) saying that Pentecostalism is a damnable heresy is not hate?
How can the OPC say "John Wesley preached Universal Infant Damnation for unbaptized infants -- which is unsurprising, because Wesley preached the Gospel of Satan" and that NOT be considered hate?
You mean ordering OPC members to not celebrate with Jews is not hate?
you mean that saying The Adventists are a cult that is as dangerous as the Jehovahs Witnesses or the Mormons is not hate?
What about this statement by the OPC on Bhatti, the Christian martyr killed by Moslems in Pakistan: This man followed the wrong teachings of Rome and we know what happens to such people. Heaven is for the elect.?
Correct. None of those statements is ‘preaching hatred.’
Let’s examine: “Pentecostalism is a damnable heresy.”
If Pentecostalism does actually lead anyone to go to hell, it is damnable, and heretical. The quoted is not a statement that shows a desire that anyone actually go to hell, which would be malicious. It is a statement of fact based upon the presuppositions that Pentecostalism is untrue, and that false doctrine, when relied upon for eternal salvation, fails to properly instruct one to the narrow path.
Correct. These statements are not ‘preaching hatred.’
How can the OPC say “John Wesley preached Universal Infant Damnation for unbaptized infants — which is unsurprising, because Wesley preached the Gospel of Satan” and that NOT be considered hate?
Assuming ‘the OPC’ said that, the statement is not preaching hatred. The statement is another conclusion based upon the assumption that John Wesley necessarily had to believe, as a result of his free will beliefs, that if a person cannot ‘choose Christ,’ and infants are unable to comprehend the Gospel, it necessarily follows that unbaptized infants would be damned. Election actually takes care of that, teaching that infants, as others, are chosen as God chooses others, and no work is required to save them. Again, if Wesley preached another Gospel, whose work would he be doing?
These statements are not wishing ill upon anyone, which would be hate speech. They are conclusions based upon what the speaker assumes to be true, i.e. orthodoxy.
You mean ordering OPC members to not celebrate with Jews is not hate?
Correct. This statement is not preaching hate.
First, you must mis-characterize the link to make your point, which weakens your cause. There was no ‘order’ to OPC members. There was a ‘should not.’ Second, the reasoning is like this - Christ is our passover. It is a lie to endorse a celebration which has been fulfilled by celebrating Seder.
It is not hate, but actually an exhortation to truth.
nothing that teachs one to hate?You want to see what teaching hate is?You mean ordering OPC members to not celebrate with Jews is not hate?
"During the Reformation, in 1555, Pope Paul IV decreed that all Jews must be segregated into their own quarters (ghettos), and they were forbidden to leave their home during the night, were banned from all but the most strenuous occupations and had to wear a distinctive badge — a yellow hat.
Jews could not own any property outside the ghetto. They were not allowed to study in higher education institutions or become lawyers, pharmacists, painters, politicians, notaries or architects. Jews were forced to pay for Christian missionaries who proselytized to the Jews and a yearly sum to the Cloister of the Converted.
These anti-Jewish laws were similar to those imposed by Nazi Germany on the Jews during World War II.
"Unfortunately for the Jews, one of Carnival’s [that is, the public celebrations prior to Lent] most popular features was the ritual degradation of the people of the ghetto.
Among the first historical references we have to such rites is a description from 1466, when for the amusement of the Romans, in festivities sponsored by Pope Paul II, Jews were made to race naked through the streets of the city. ...Before they were to run, the Jews were richly fed, so as to make the race more difficult for them, and at the same time, more amusing for the spectators. They ran from the Arch of Domitian to the Church of St. Mark at the end of the Corso at full tilt, amid Rome’s taunting shrieks of encouragement and peals of laughter, while the Holy Father stood upon a richly ornamented balcony and laughed heartily.
Two centuries later, these practices, now deemed indecorous and unbefitting the dignity of the Holy City, were stopped by Clement IX. In their place the Pope assessed a heavy tax on the Jews to help pay the costs of the city’s Carnival celebrations.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/vjw/Rome.html
http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/02/popes-against-jews-part-5-you-will.html