Pastor Tupirani da Hora Lores preaches at his church in Rio de Janeiro, June 2020. (Courtesy of Sinagoga Sem Fronteiras via JTA)
Posted on 06/22/2020 12:52:22 AM PDT by Cronos
Pastor Tupirani da Hora Lores preaches at his church in Rio de Janeiro, June 2020. (Courtesy of Sinagoga Sem Fronteiras via JTA)
A Brazilian pastor prayed to God to “destroy the Jews like vermin” and bring about a second Holocaust during a sermon in Rio de Janeiro.
“Massacre the Jews, God, hit them with your sword, for they have left God, they have left the nations,” Pastor Tupirani da Hora Lores shouted at dozens of congregants earlier this month at his Geracao Jesus Cristo church, a recording of the event shows. His congregants are heard repeating his words passionately.
Fronteiras via JTA)
JTA — A Brazilian pastor prayed to God to “destroy the Jews like vermin” and bring about a second Holocaust during a sermon in Rio de Janeiro.
“Massacre the Jews, God, hit them with your sword, for they have left God, they have left the nations,” Pastor Tupirani da Hora Lores shouted at dozens of congregants earlier this month at his Geracao Jesus Cristo church, a recording of the event shows. His congregants are heard repeating his words passionately.
“They contrived, went with prostitutes, and when they were told to repent they said they’d do it but they lied,” the pastor said,....
“God, what you have done in World War II, you must do again, this is what we ask for in our prayers to you: Justice, justice, justice!” da Hora Lores shouted at his church, a small and radical evangelical congregation.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesofisrael.com ...
I USED TO BE A NORMAL PERSON - with 'normal' labels!
As a man, I used to think I was pretty much just a regular person, but I was born white, into a two-parent household which now, whether I like it or not, makes me "Privileged", a racist & responsible for slavery.
I am a fiscal & moral conservative, which by today's standards, makes me a fascist because I plan, budget & support myself.
I went to High School, got a degree, got in some college & have always held a job. But I now find out that I am not here because I earned it, but because I was "advantaged”.
I am heterosexual, which according to "gay" folks, now makes me a homophobic.
I am not a Muslim, which now labels me as an infidel.
I believe in the 2nd Amendment, which makes me a de facto member of the "vast NRA gun lobby”
I am older than 60, making me a useless eater who doesn't understand Facebook, Instagram, or Snapchat.
I think & I reason, and I doubt much of what the "mainstream" media tells me, which makes me a "Right-wing conspiracy nut”.
I am proud of my heritage & our inclusive American culture, making me a xenophobe.
I believe in hard work, fair play, & fair compensation according to each individual's merits, which today makes me an anti-socialist.
I believe our system guarantees freedom of effort - not freedom of outcome or subsidies which makes me a borderline sociopath.
I believe in the defense & protection of America for & by all citizens, now making me a militant.
I am proud of our flag, what it stands for and the many who died to let it fly, so I stand & salute during our National Anthem - so I must be a racist.
Please help me come to terms with the new me because I'm just not sure who I am anymore!
Funny - it all took place over the last 7 or 8 years! If all this nonsense wasn't enough to deal with, now I don't even know which restroom to use, and I gotta go more FREQUENTLY!
Ok, if you say so... :)
Hey Bro, you’re the one who started the discussion.
Let’s see, you read about this Evangelical pastor calling for Israel’s destruction and you then got into a frenzy.
Then it became the “no true Scotsman” argument - or the “no true Muslim” argument used by jihadi excusers and your post went “No true evangelical....”
strange
So you found one isolated article from an overseas source about some random pastor in BRAZIL who some has claimed is an evangelical, and you run with it like it’s sent down from Mt Sinai.
And at the comments section at the link the FIRST comment that I read, was this......
“ This is old news from more than 2 yeara ago. He has been sentenced to serve 3 years in jail already for this”
I’d say this is pretty disingenuous of you.
And hypocritical, considering Catholicism has been smoozing with the muslims, the biggest persecutors of Jews and Christians worldwide for years. And all based on your Catechism of the Catholic church and your past few recent popes who do things like kiss the Koran in submission to it.
I’d say nice try, but it’s really a very pathetic and weak attempt to smear Biblical Christians, so it doesn’t even qualify for that.
Based upon your false criteria Santeria is Catholic. Yet your brethren disallow pope Francis as being a Catholic. You must thus own both.
"As defined" by nothing. Meanwhile the NT believers differentiated themselves from other non-orthodoxy groups by the emphasis on the "born again" experience, of conversion thru regenerating heart-purifying faith, thanks be to God.
That's also why this Brazil evangelical group is evangelical in beliefs and is also heavily anti-Jewish and anti-Catholic
As said, it seems obvious that this is an attempted hit job against evangelicals (enemy #1 for conservative Catholics who can only wish their church voted as conservative as evangelicals) that has backfired. The basis for use of the term "evangelical here is the issue, for while a broad use of the term can be used, as the sole proffered criteria for uncritically classes this negative fringe church to be Evangelical makes the NT church to be so - which they were - but in isolation from other fundamental beliefs then cults like the Mormons could be called Christian and evangelical. However, such isolationist basis is not allowed by Catholics as regards themselves, many of whom ("true Catholics") even reject Francis as Catholic, based upon their understanding of what faithful Catholic teaching is and means.
But while Catholicism autocratically defines what a Catholic is, thus Catholics are to be considered Catholic if Rome manifestly considers them to be so, yet the term "Christian" should be defined based upon the definitive source of that term, which disallows Mormonism as well as full-assenting Catholics from being so. Likewise while the term "evangelical" can be broadly used (and many pollsters I reference do so), yet it is best defined upon what it originally meant. We are told, "The terms fundamentalist and fundamentalism originally referred to a particular movement of conservative Protestants in early 20th-century America. But in recent decades, they have been frequently applied far beyond this context." (https://www.christiancentury.org/review/books/will-real-fundamentalists-please-stand)
While pollsters I know of usually (wrongly) class respondents as evangelical by combining "born again" with that term, or (more rarely) based upon their own self-description, to its credit Barna has traditionally used nine questions to categorize people as evangelicals:
“Evangelicals” meet the born again criteria (described above) plus seven other conditions. Those include saying their faith is very important in their life today; believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; believing that Satan exists; believing that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works; believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches; and describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today. Being classified as an evangelical is not dependent upon church attendance or the denominational affiliation of the church attended. Respondents were not asked to describe themselves as “evangelical...”
Using the nine questions about their beliefs produces a much smaller figure: just 8% of the adult population in 2006 fit the criteria. In other words, the number of self-defined evangelicals outnumbers the 9-point evangelicals by a margin of nearly five-to-one. (The nine factors examined are listed in the Research Details section at the end of this report.)
When extrapolating these percentages across the entire adult population, the difference is staggering: 84 million adults based on self-report versus 18 million using the nine-point theological filter.
Also intriguing is the fact that 86% of the 9-point evangelicals also call themselves evangelicals. In stark contrast, just one out of every five self-proclaimed evangelicals (19%) meets the Barna Group’s nine-point definition.
Demographic Profiles Differ
Those who consider themselves to be evangelicals differ in their demographic background from those who meet the more stringent Barna Group definition. The self-proclaimed evangelicals are less likely to have graduated from college (29%, versus 39% among the 9-point evangelicals); less likely to be married (63%, versus 77% among the 9-point segment); less likely to be white (66% vs. 76%); and have much lower average household incomes ($40,250 for the self-reported evangelicals, compared to $49,194 among the 9-point evangelicals). On the other hand, self-defined evangelicals are more likely to emerge from the Northeast or West (35% of the self-defined groups is from those two regions combined versus 27% among the 9-point evangelicals residing in those two areas) and are more likely to be 60 or older (38% versus 31%).
There are huge gaps between the two groups in terms of political inclinations. For instance, those who are self-described evangelicals are much less likely to say they are mostly conservative on social and political matters (45%, compared to 65% among the 9-point evangelicals). They are also considerably more likely to be registered to vote as a Democrat (35%, compared to just 26% among the 9-point evangelicals) and less likely to be registered as a Republican (42%, compared to 51% among the 9-point evangelicals). Seen in a different light, there is only a seven percentage point difference in the number of Democrats and Republicans among the self-defined evangelicals, but a 25-point difference among those who are deemed evangelical by virtue of their beliefs.
Radical Differences in Beliefs
The most striking differences relate to the beliefs of each group. Compared to the 9-point evangelicals, those who say they are evangelicals are:
In fact, the Barna research also noted that one out of every four adults (27%) who say they are evangelicals is not even born again, based upon their beliefs. (The Barna Group defines someone as born again if they say they have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and who also indicate that they believe when they die they will go to Heaven because they have confessed their sins and have accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. Respondents are not asked to describe themselves as “born again.”)
you call it a hit job against Evangelicals. Why?
When it is clearly talking about an evangelical pastor in Brazil you then see it as an attack on you. Why?
This guy is as much of a “pastor” as Jim Jones was.
As clearly seen in the Reichskirche (the German Evangelical Church) — there are loads of other instances where evangelical groups holding to the solas + “born again” have other, beliefs.
Do you share their beliefs? Probably no - neither do you share the beliefs of Oneness Pentecostals or pretty much any other “evangelical group”
You even have people saying Paula White and Joel Osteen aren’t Evangelicals.
The Lutherans are called the Evangelical church of Augsburg
As regards the evangelical self-definition and differentiation in the USA based on what they think is "born again" -- and based on that, this Brazilian pastor is an evangelical pastor as the article points out
So perhaps instead of the term "evangelical" you should use the term "the church of dan 12" instead of the "no true evangelical" argument?
It's definitely an umbrella term, the term "evangelical" as it includes Jim, Joel, Paula, this Brazilnut :)
As Daniel pointed out, the term is very broad. So no point in some American evangelicals getting worked up about it as anyone can be an evangelical
Do you really think this is an valid argument? Do you think you have provided any evidence that the Reichskirche - with its Hitler-chosen head and which officially disbanded in 1945 and issued the Stuttgart Declaration of Guilt in that year - called itself Evangelical based upon your sole criteria for being so, or that this radical group is representative of historical evangelical faith? If so, you should have no objection to those being called Christian as well, and a very broad use of the term Catholic. For it is your uncritical use of the term evangelical as a slur that is the issue.
Are you serious? You have utterly failed to show that either calls itself evangelical based upon this sole criteria, or that what they think is "born again," yet you continue to fail away in an seeming attempt to negatively impugn evangelicals. Thus do you want to see (again) how those who are called evangelicals in America compare with those who are called Catholics on matters of faith and morals? If so, continue to defend your pejorative use of the former term.
What a sad dude this Cronos is....
Their life must be miserable.
Danny boy — the Brazilian evangelical pastor is pretty clear that he is born again. just as clear as he is with his anti-semitism and anti-Catholicism
Another vain attempted to defend your negative use of the term evangelical. Here you attempt to make the argument into being a requirement of wide doctrinal conformity while the issue has been your sole criteria used to justify your negative use of the term evangelical, as if this fringe church was representative of evangelicals. Thus in order to sustain your negative use of the term evangelical based upon your article you need to provide a doctrinal statement of the beliefs of this church so we can see how they compared with those who are termed evangelical in America.
It’s not an argument, just a clear pointing out of people calling themselves evangelicals, but with different opinions on other topics.
your own belief system differs from other people calling themselves evangelical. So the “No true evangelical” argument fails as well, every evangelical has their own belief system - down to the Oneness Pentecostals rejecting the Trinity
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.