Interesting Article from a Conservative Apostolic

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by rrford

If you want to question my integrity and honesty just do so and without innunedo and inane questions.

I assure you I am not even remotely trying to protect the members of that Forum.As a matter of a fact, I was booted from that Forum.

It saddens me that you cannot see that my call was for genuine Christianity. As Miss Brattified said "What has happened to us?" Especially if you and others want to cast apsersions on my sincere appeal. Sorry you dind't read it that way. I will sleep well tonight knowing that I know my heart and waht my real intent was.

But, why is this forbidden to discuss? Why is the attitude shown in those posts not to be questioned? That's all I am saying.

Is it Christian to just ignore that?

You agree it's sad - that's all I'm saying too. I've sent no one to hell - just wondering how a brother can turn on another like that.

[Mrs. LPW]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Yes, it is.

All we have done is defend Scott, Sherri and Eddie.

Look, I don't even agree with Eddie and Sherri's theology, but I think they were maligned by these men.

To be honest with you, I think it's despicable the way these men run to their private conclaves and spew out bile. Reminds me of cockroaches running from the light.

UUUUMMMMM please point me to the "defend Scott" posts lol

I think Miss B's post should be post of the day.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

And you think that that point is central to the issue at hand....how and why?

To me, this whole "closed forum" point you're harping on is simply serving as a red herring.

And you Sir, are insulting to my intent and motive. Go and learn what that meaneth as I have neither the time nor inclination for your continual questioning of my sincere motive. It seems to me that you would rather justify the lack of Christianity on this thread by trying to find a red herring.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

Yes, it is.

All we have done is defend Scott, Sherri and Eddie.

Look, I don't even agree with Eddie and Sherri's theology, but I think they were maligned by these men.

To be honest with you, I think it's despicable the way these men run to their private conclaves and spew out bile. Reminds me of cockroaches running from the light.

Respectfully PP, I like Eddi & Sherri, & I don't even know them.
I of course do not believe in all things the same as you, but can I ask what this last paragraph does to help them?

We are no better by statements like this.

JMHO

[rrford]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I agree. I think.

Miss Bratt - we should stand up and say something when we see or hear the things that the blogger revealed. Standing up to bullies is imperative if there is ever to be peace on the playground.

And rrford - No, standing up to a bully isn't the moral equivalence of being a bully yourself. There's a difference. If you have never found the difference then I feel sorry for you.

Standing up to a bully in a non-Christian way is still non-Christian. Save your sympathy for someone who needs it.

[Rico]

It's amazing how one post can turn this forum upside down in no time flat. This thread was started for one reason and one reason only, to start a fight. It worked.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by rrford

Perhaps to you. It was sincere on my part. And frankly, I am weary of justifying it. Perhaps you folks should consider how such posts sound when you throw them out there.

The question is not whether you were sincere or not. The fact is, you are taking what is a side-issue and making it seem like it is the main issue to you. I find that a bit puzzling.

Originally Posted by rrford

And you Sir, are insulting to my intent and motive. Go and learn what that meaneth as I have neither the time nor inclination for your continual questioning of my sincere motive. It seems to me that you would rather justify the lack of Christianity on this thread by trying to find a red herring.

Brother, spare us. No need to make yourself a martyr here.
Nobody is questioning your sincerity, motive, etc.
I am referring to the EFFECT of you harping on single corner of this issue, while ignoring the central issue under discussion.

[Mrs. LPW]

PP,

(and I'm going to kick myself for bothering with this) but...

I honestly don't know how you can say some of the harsh things you say, and yet have a problem with Ron's posts... he seems more kind than you.


Yeah.. I'm gonna regret this.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Ron

Respectfully PP, I like Eddi & Sherri, & I don't even know them.
I of course do not believe in all things the same as you, but can I ask what this last paragraph does to help them?

We are no better by statements like this.

JMHO

Maybe, maybe not.

But it is, if nothing else, one hundred percent truth.

Ron, I think the real trouble is that you recognize some of those initials and locations and realize they are some of your posting buddies from another forum.

[dizzyde]

So, let me get this straight, what some of us seem to be saying is that it is only right to have righteous indignation over a man of God being attacked when... well, when?

I seem to remember some people getting pretty heated with indignation over the way another preacher was being spoken about, a week or so ago.

Who gets to make the decision about when it is OK, and when it isn't. Color me confused.