Bott '14

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

When I was 17, I met JA at a college preview event. Shook his hand and he autographed my event schedule.

Decades later, I doubt he remembers who I am, and I'm quite sure nothing I've posted will cause his life to unravel.

Time for me to leave for now. I've done beat the horse dead I think. Funny how the thread started so well...like many threads on here. Haha!

You know, if it was some other preacher who called JA an idiot, I'd have been just as disappointed and upset about it. It's not about the person, really. Although JA's the only preacher I've heard use that word in a message.

My problem with your argument is not about his use of the word idiot. We can both agree that it was problematic. My problem is you calling him a liar and saying he took Maxwell's quote out of context.

You don't know that he took it out of context because you don't know what SG even said, exactly. Having established that fact, even if you knew what SG had said, exactly, it doesn't negate the fact that JA interpreted the quote in the context of how he heard it or how the context of the quote came across to him personally.

That doesn't make him a liar. It means he heard something in the context of the said quote that caused him to focus on that one point and vehemently disagree with it.

I'm disappointed that in order to win the argument, you would go so far as to call JA a liar and be proud that you did with no regret.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

My problem with your argument is not about his use of the word idiot. We can both agree that it was problematic. My problem is you calling him a liar and saying he took Maxwell's quote out of context.

He did take Maxwell's quote out of context. Maxwell said nothing about blaming Pastors for the sins of others. As to whether he took SG's comments out of context, I don't know yet.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

You don't know that he took it out of context because you don't know what SG even said, exactly. Having established that fact, even if you knew what SG had said, exactly, it doesn't negate the fact that JA interpreted the quote in the context of how he heard it or how the context of the quote came across to him personally.

So then anyone is free to misinterpret and be willfully ignorant about the context something is said, and that's ok with you? It's not right! You cannot claim someone said something if they did not...regardless of how you interpret it. If SG did not say what JA said he did, that is a lie. It's not just his view or interpretation.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

That doesn't make him a liar. It means he heard something in the context of the said quote that caused him to focus on that one point and vehemently disagree with it.

IF, and you don't like if's...but IF that's what SG said. Again, Maxwell does not blame Pastors, which is what JA said. Maybe SG did. It would be a really dumb comment to make, considering SG is a seasoned Pastor.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I'm disappointed that in order to win the argument, you would go so far as to call JA a liar and be proud that you did with no regret.

PO, if someone claims that a person said something that person didn't say, it's a lie. I teach this to my daughter, and it's the same (doubly so) for ministers. And FTR, I haven't come out and said JA lied, I said "If SG did not say what JA claimed he said, then that is a lie."

And no, I wouldn't regret it. I've had preachers lie to me before and I've called them out on it. I don't care what your title is, if you say something which isn't true, it's a lie.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by n david

As to whether he took SG's comments out of context, I don't know yet.

Exactly!