PAJC- THIEVES, LIARS, and HYPOCRITES

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Do you have anything concrete to back up your accusation?

You have a sweeping generalization here and serious accusations but no support

What do you challenge as being untrue Prax?

[MrMasterMind]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

What do you challenge as being untrue Prax?

[Liberal]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

What do you challenge as being untrue Prax?

Isn't the burden of proof on the accuser?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Liberal

Isn't the burden of proof on the accuser?

Sounded like an opening statement to me.
Laying out the facts.

If the facts are not in dispute no proof is necessary.

[Liberal]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Sounded like an opening statement to me.
Laying out the facts.

If the facts are not in dispute no proof is necessary.

So we're prepared here to convict someone on an accusation only if no one answers the accusation?

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by MrMasterMind

PAJC- Thieves, Liars, and Hypocrites

Unfortunately, there is no other conclusion based on the postings of PAJC progeny and their revisionist leaders/historians. (Including UPC leaders, Bible school teachers, and even some GIBs)

It is indisputable that the PCI was better organized and funded at the time of the merger. They even had headquarters, offices, and the like, whereas the PAJC did not.

According to the revisionists, the PAJC leaders felt from the beginning that the PCI’s theology was in error and they were lost. Furthermore, the unity clause was merely to give them time to come around to PAJC way of thinking or the time would come would come when they would be expelled. (Or excreted depending on which Westburg-ite was speaking.)

It then follows, they were liars. They did not truly believe the unity clause.

They were thieves, it was their intent to get their hands on the PCI’s property and later expel them.

They were hypocrites of the worst sort. To their face they told the PCI brethren that they were just that- brothers in Christ, but really believed them to be lost and hell bound. Perhaps even worse, as they were preachers leading others astray.

Revisionists also claim their forefathers made a mistake, the merger never should have happened, and the heretics never should have been let in.

On the other hand, if you believe like I do, that the merger was sincere; that they believed the PCI were brethren; that it was not as important whether baptism in Jesus’ name was because sins had been remitted or whether it was done to remit sins, as much as the fact both taught baptism in Jesus’ name as a commandment. Then the revisionists are mistaken and the PAJC was not a bunch of thieves, liars, and hypocrites after all.

Mr. Mastermind can you tell us what facts you rely on to say that PCI was organized? and that the PAJC were not?

[MrMasterMind]

Originally Posted by Liberal

So we're prepared here to convict someone on an accusation only if no one answers the accusation?

And what exactly is.... "the accusation"

[MrMasterMind]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Mr. Mastermind can you tell us what facts you rely on to say that PCI was organized? and that the PAJC were not?

Steve Epley for one. :-)

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by Liberal

So we're prepared here to convict someone on an accusation only if no one answers the accusation?

If you do not dispute the facts as being untrue then we have a summary judgment situation.

[MrMasterMind]

It is undisputed that PCI had property and a headquarters and PAJC did not.

Nevertheless that is ONLY important IF one believes the PAJC lied.