Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

The Bible Answer Man


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Mr. Hanegraaff is a professional propagandist. Within his profession is an All-Star and pulls down a VERY lucrative living doing so. If Evangelicals had a Hall of Fame, he'd be inducted on the first year of eligibility.

Is it any wonder that an average Mormon caller is going to be twisted in knots debating Mormon topics on his home court...where he makes the rules?

It would be like me (5'6") going up against Shaq in one-on-one hoops. The best I could hope to do is kick him in the shins while he dunks over me.

Cue the hightlight video.

Six

Edited by Bsix
Posted

Either Hank Hanegraff is misinformed, ignorant, or lies. May be a combination of all three. In any case he misrepresents the churches doctrines on many issues and brings up "obscure" comments from past General Authorities, which are not considered official doctrines or official stances of the church. When such things are brought up from time to time by Hank, members of the church (well-intentioned) call in to defend their most sacred beliefs and to hopefully set the record straight.

...

What are your opinions?

Hanegraaff is, at best, a synthesizer of others' materials, rather than an original thinker. I don't consider him The Bible Answer Man.

I place his radio program on the same level of quality as, say, Catholic Answers Live (with no undue offense intended to Roman Catholics).

...

There is good evidence suggesting that Hanegraaff has, well, prevaricated, in the past, but if he has misrepresented official Mormon positions, I would chalk those "infelicities" up to either misinformation or ignorance rather than intentional deceit. The fairly well-documented instances of his alleged deceit, at least those of which I'm aware, are about personal matters.

My $0.02.

Posted

There is good evidence suggesting that Hanegraaff has, well, prevaricated, in the past, but if he has misrepresented official Mormon positions, I would chalk those "infelicities" up to either misinformation or ignorance rather than intentional deceit. The fairly well-documented instances of his alleged deceit, at least those of which I'm aware, are about personal matters.

My $0.02.

If it is misinformation or ignorance IMNSHO it is willful. I am of the opinion that he has had ample opportunity to be informed.

Posted

If it is misinformation or ignorance IMNSHO it is willful. I am of the opinion that he has had ample opportunity to be informed.

Frankly, I think your assessment gives him too much credit. Consider the source, sure. But, also, you know, consider the source.

Posted

Frankly, I think your assessment gives him too much credit. Consider the source, sure. But, also, you know, consider the source.

Perhaps your right.

Posted (edited)

I know of people who have sent him corrections of his errors that he chooses to ignore in favour of continuing his error. I suppose this could be explained as refusal to accept the corrections as valid, but a few cases were pretty cut and dried so in seems to me "willful" is accurate....along the lines of...say....flat earthers.

Edited by calmoriah
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...