Bill O'Reilly

  • Thread starter Thread starter MyPseudonym
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MyPseudonym said:
O’Reilly said that the nuns taught him that many of the stories in the Old Testament are allegorical.
Click to expand...
If he wants to tout his faith on the air, i expect him to take the few minutes it takes and look up officially what the Church teaches on google.

If he can’t bother to do that, sotp claiming you are Catholic. I am not saying he was wrong per se, but simply that it isn’t hard to stay current on teachings to purport to represent.
 
Judie Brown criticized O’Reilly in her 2007 book Saving Those Damned Catholics.
 
MyPseudonym said:
O’Reilly said that the nuns taught him that many of the stories in the Old Testament are allegorical.
Click to expand...
So he has a fifth grade knowledge of his faith? How hard is it to google the Vatican website or some good Catholic website to find out the truth?
 
severus68 said:
Something wrong with social justice? Am quite sure Christ if he lived today would be all for it.
Click to expand...
Sorry for the misstatement. I mean the Leftist liberal version of social justice where government provides everything for everyone. Not that we shouldn’t take care of others
 
As someone who has watched O’Reilly for over 6 years I feel that I can comment on this. The other night O’Reilly had a Baptist preacher successfully refute O’Reilly’s arguments about how some aspects of the OT are allegorical to which the preacher asked him if he believed in the Virgin Birth. O’Reilly said yes but made a pathetic distinction saying that NT is different from OT. I think O’Reilly realized he lost it at that point but his pride is so great in himself that perhaps not.

Which leads me to my next point about O’Reilly. For those who watch him you hear him refer himself as “Your humble correspondent”. For the record O’Reilly has as much humility as Pres. Obama has. He reminds me of so many other journalists who think having a journalism degree is tantamount to divinity that you are an expert on everything. He has arrogantly argued legal points with Megyn Kelly who is an actual lawyer on why the SCOTUS will overturn Obamacare (oops), why the SCOTUS majority was wrong with Westboro Baptist Church and other economic issues.

However, on the other hand he is fiercely against abortion on his tv casts. He has had Lila Rose on it many times and allowed her to present her case to his viewing audience.

I like watching his show because unlike Hannity who is a total hack, he gets very good guests on the show from different points of view. Dennis Miller is always good for a laugh but my favorite has to be Greg Gutfeld.

My 2 cents worth!
 
MyPseudonym said:
O’Reilly said that the nuns taught him that many of the stories in the Old Testament are allegorical.
Click to expand...
The nuns told me that the bible was written in parables, meaning that not everything was to be taken literally.
 
JMJSHJ said:
As someone who has watched O’Reilly for over 6 years I feel that I can comment on this. The other night O’Reilly had a Baptist preacher successfully refute O’Reilly’s arguments about how some aspects of the OT are allegorical to which the preacher asked him if he believed in the Virgin Birth. O’Reilly said yes but made a pathetic distinction saying that NT is different from OT. I think O’Reilly realized he lost it at that point but his pride is so great in himself that perhaps not.

Which leads me to my next point about O’Reilly. For those who watch him you hear him refer himself as “Your humble correspondent”. For the record O’Reilly has as much humility as Pres. Obama has. He reminds me of so many other journalists who think having a journalism degree is tantamount to divinity that you are an expert on everything. He has arrogantly argued legal points with Megyn Kelly who is an actual lawyer on why the SCOTUS will overturn Obamacare (oops), why the SCOTUS majority was wrong with Westboro Baptist Church and other economic issues.

However, on the other hand he is fiercely against abortion on his tv casts. He has had Lila Rose on it many times and allowed her to present her case to his viewing audience.

I like watching his show because unlike Hannity who is a total hack, he gets very good guests on the show from different points of view. Dennis Miller is always good for a laugh but my favorite has to be Greg Gutfeld.

My 2 cents worth!
Click to expand...
I’ve watched him 8 years , and I agree with you. Especially about Gutfeld. Back to the point, Take away Adam & Eve, you take away original sin, then why baptism and why the cross?
 
georget said:
Take away Adam & Eve, you take away original sin, then why baptism and why the cross?
Click to expand...
No one is taking away Adam and Eve. The point is that, while the Church teaches the reality of the first man and woman (i.e. Adam and Eve), she also teaches that the reality of the first couple in Genesis is written in a manner to express spiritual truths rather than a literal pre-history of mankind. To argue that Adam and Eve were real and everything happened exactly as stated in Genesis is to miss the point of the inspired author.
 
Timothysis said:
No one is taking away Adam and Eve. The point is that, while the Church teaches the reality of the first man and woman (i.e. Adam and Eve), she also teaches that the reality of the first couple in Genesis is written in a manner to express spiritual truths rather than a literal pre-history of mankind. To argue that Adam and Eve were real and everything happened exactly as stated in Genesis is to miss the point of the inspired author.
Click to expand...
NO. O’Reilly said he didn’t believe in a literal adam and Eve he believes in evolution, that the story was a parable. Like I said before, it’s not personal, he might be the greatest guy in the world, but he said what he said and I heard what I heard. I’m not saying the story isn’t a parable, all I’m saying is if he’s correct, why have baptism and why the cross.
Ps
Gutfeld can be hillarious:D
 
georget said:
NO. O’Reilly said he didn’t believe in a literal adam and Eve he believes in evolution, that the story was a parable. Like I said before, it’s not personal, he might be the greatest guy in the world, but he said what he said and I heard what I heard. I’m not saying the story isn’t a parable, all I’m saying is if he’s correct, why have baptism and why the cross.
Ps
Gutfeld can be hillarious:D
Click to expand...
I personally don’t care what O’Reilly says about anything…I’m talking about what the Church teaches.

O’Reilly’s intellect is about as deep as the shallow end of a kiddie pool. He can fake his way talking politics but when he tries religion, he is in over his head. Having watched him for years I came to the conclusion that he doesn’t really seem to be overly smart. Yet, he gets millions of viewers a night…go figure!

And Gutfeld can be amusing but any attempt at a semi-serious discussion is nothing but a waste of time. I stopped watching The Five because he and his co-horts jump from one topic to the next without settling anything.
 
Timothysis said:
I personally don’t care what O’Reilly says about anything…I’m talking about what the Church teaches.

O’Reilly’s intellect is about as deep as the shallow end of a kiddie pool. He can fake his way talking politics but when he tries religion, he is in over his head. Having watched him for years I came to the conclusion that he doesn’t really seem to be overly smart. Yet, he gets millions of viewers a night…go figure!

And Gutfeld can be amusing but any attempt at a semi-serious discussion is nothing but a waste of time. I stopped watching The Five because he and his co-horts jump from one topic to the next without settling anything.
Click to expand...
Yes and thread was about what O Rielly said. I know what the church teaches , and I agree.I was pointing out the shallowness of his theory. I’ll stand by what I said. The five is awful, wretched, but Gutfeld can come up with some decent one liners
 
PolarGuy said:
There may be room to differ.

For example…I happen to think that “Adam and Eve” were the first people to have human souls, and the first sinners. Were they named “Adam” and “Eve”? I have no idea, and it’s not really relevant, is it? Does that make them “allegorical”? I don’t know; maybe somewhat. I also think it’s 100% consistent with Church teaching.
Click to expand...
I think they existed. Weren’t there saints who saw them?
 
Timothy
**
O’Reilly’s intellect is about as deep as the shallow end of a kiddie pool. He can fake his way talking politics but when he tries religion, he is in over his head.**

As are most of us! 😃
 
Limerickman said:
How else did Sin enter the world?

O’Reilly is entitled to his opinion but his opinion in this regard is wrong.
Adam and Eve did exist.
We know they existed because through Adam and Eve, Sin entered the world.
Click to expand...
Do you have any proof they were real?
 
Limerickman said:
How else did Sin enter the world?

O’Reilly is entitled to his opinion but his opinion in this regard is wrong.
Adam and Eve did exist.
We know they existed because through Adam and Eve, Sin entered the world.
Click to expand...
Do you have any proof they were real?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top