A Relevant Holiness Message

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Is the word bad the word wrong?

Wrong attitude doesn't necessarily mean bad.

Well, I was equivocating the two. "Wrong" seems "Bad" to me. A wrong choice is a bad choice. A wrong answer on a test is always a bad answer...if you're wanting a good grade, that is.

But whichever, I can use the word, "Wrong" in its place, I suppose. That being said, DA's style isn't my style, although I'll passionately argue my point. But I like his style. There have been times when I've thought, "Ok Dan, time to turn down the mic" but his burden is not my burden and I give him the space to bear his burden the way he thinks he should.

There are some that DA doesn't have an audience with, and can't have an audience with. They don't and won't respond to his style. But just as equally true? He gets a very significant audience that none of us will ever speak to and I know directly many of the people he has been able to influence in a greatly positive way that most or none of us could have ever affected. Great voices have great influence and I think he's a great voice.

Maybe the polar opposite of him, yet of a similar viewpoint, would be AQP. She has an impact on people that don't like DA's volume. Ultimately? God gives diverse giftings to people (Romans 12, I Corinthians 12) because different people respond to different styles. I think DA and AQP are both equally important and equally legitimate, even though they're radically different.

So anyway, there's my DA defense whether needed or not.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

LOL! Yes, it's a buzzard. Funny thing about buzzards, they are nasty creatures and pick meat off to the bone. Don't care where they get their meal. Don't care what it is. They just like picking to the bone.

And you're insinuating that assembling these two videos and posting them is buzzard-like activity? I guess I disagree with you, there. I guess the point that Michael Phelps was making, now that I understand it, is...if this were Benny Hinn in this scenario, I doubt you'd be posting a picture of a buzzard.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by notofworks

And you're insinuating that assembling these two videos and posting them is buzzard-like activity? I guess I disagree with you, there. I guess the point that Michael Phelps was making, now that I understand it, is...if this were Benny Hinn in this scenario, I doubt you'd be posting a picture of a buzzard.

I think it's buzzard like to hunt down and post any group or person. Especially those that we may not agree with in their style or presentation, but are certainly not living in sin or supporting sin. Why the persecution? Why follow someone around like a buzzard posting their Facebook comments, posting videos at their church, etc. - hounding, hounding, hounding.......

On a side note: And again, on the Trinitarian thing. I think there are a whole lot of people who call themselves Trinitarian, who are not. My mother and a couple of my sisters for example. They believe that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh. That isn't Trinitarianism. John Bevere, in the quote I posted earlier, is a Trinitarian. God is not three "persons".

I suppose, really, if I don't agree with the process of something, I should probably not comment at all. Because it doesn't seem to make a difference.

After all, we are all Bereans, right? That makes it okay to pick things apart. LOL!

What I like and respect about the Bereans is that:

"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (Acts 17:11)

They didn't attack Paul.

We can say, "I don't see anywhere in scripture....". Well, let's discuss scripture and not the person or people. JMO.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I think it's buzzard like to hunt down and post any group or person. Especially those that we may not agree with in their style or presentation, but are certainly not living in sin or supporting sin. Why the persecution? Why follow someone around like a buzzard posting their Facebook comments, posting videos at their church, etc. - hounding, hounding, hounding.......

On a side note: And again, on the Trinitarian thing. I think there are a whole lot of people who call themselves Trinitarian, who are not. My mother and a couple of my sisters for example. They believe that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh. That isn't Trinitarianism. John Bevere, in the quote I posted earlier, is a Trinitarian. God is not three "persons".

I suppose, really, if I don't agree with the process of something, I should probably not comment at all. Because it doesn't seem to make a difference.

After all, we are all Bereans, right? That makes it okay to pick things apart. LOL!

What I like and respect about the Bereans is that:

"Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (Acts 17:11)

They didn't attack Paul.

We can say, "I don't see anywhere in scripture....". Well, let's discuss scripture and not the person or people. JMO.

First, every trinitarian I've ever met in my life believes that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh.

Second, DA isn't the only one to post RM stuff. I've seen Socialite do it and DA doesn't just target RM. Recently, he posted something by one of the Godair fellows. In both these cases, it was someone who saw/heard something who alerted DA to it and he posted it. If you think DA sits in his house vigorously looking for RM stuff in every waking moment, I don't think you have an accurate picture of him.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by notofworks

First, every trinitarian I've ever met in my life believes that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh.

Second, DA isn't the only one to post RM stuff. I've seen Socialite do it and DA doesn't just target RM. Recently, he posted something by one of the Godair fellows. In both these cases, it was someone who saw/heard something who alerted DA to it and he posted it. If you think DA sits in his house vigorously looking for RM stuff in every waking moment, I don't think you have an accurate picture of him.

I guess it just seems strange and uncomfortable, to me, to post something from someone's Facebook or church website and talk about it on-line. Like they embezzled money or something. LOL! It's one of those things that you know is going to come back and bite you somewhere down the road.

We pretty much had a character assassination, publicly, of RM and GP here. Anyone lurking who doesn't know them, will be given a certain impression that is not the whole of their lives or character. I think that is a shame.

I'm not against discussing things that have been made a matter of public record in the news, etc. Bringing something up and making it the news myself? "Did you see or read this? Let me point out this flaw or inconsistency to you."

And like my husband said, "Some things I don't agree with, but I'm not going to talk about GP or anyone else." Couldn't agree more. I'm just glad he is that way. He would never become a part of this forum and participate like that. It's not his way. And I am very sure that he would agree with MP's post. He just wouldn't voice it publicly. We talk privately about things, but we don't share things publicly.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I guess it just seems strange and uncomfortable, to me, to post something from someone's Facebook or church website and talk about it on-line. Like they embezzled money or something. LOL! It's one of those things that you know is going to come back and bite you somewhere down the road.

We pretty much had a character assassination, publicly, of RM and GP here. Anyone lurking who doesn't know them, will be given a certain impression that is not the whole of their lives or character. I think that is a shame.

I'm not against discussing things that have been made a matter of public record in the news, etc. Bringing something up and making it the news myself? "Did you see or read this? Let me point out this flaw or inconsistency to you."

And like my husband said, "Some things I don't agree with, but I'm not going to talk about GP or anyone else." Couldn't agree more. I'm just glad he is that way. He would never become a part of this forum and participate like that. It's not his way. And I am very sure that he would agree with MP's post. He just wouldn't voice it publicly. We talk privately about things, but we don't share things publicly.

Why not share it publicly tho?

I mean, Jesus made a public display when people turned His house into a den of thieves. Paul withstood Peter greatly to his face when he felt that Peter was being hypocritical. Whoever put the video of the sermon on YouTube made it public domain.

I don't see anyone assassinating anyone else's character on this thread, simply disagreeing with their actions.

Are we so politically correct that we can't even do that for fear of offending each other?

I'm quite sure that GP wouldn't be offended at our conversation, he'd probably laugh about it. If he wasn't too sensitive to say the things he did in the pulpit PUBLICLY, then I'm not too sensitive to disagree with him publicly.

I don't know GP personally, I"ve met him one time, and played golf with him several years ago. I'm sure he's a good man, and no one implied he was living in sin. However, public actions beg for public discussion, and as long as we limit our conversation to the actions, and not impugn the actor's character, we are not violating any scripture, that I know of.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Why not share it publicly tho?

I mean, Jesus made a public display when people turned His house into a den of thieves. Paul withstood Peter greatly to his face when he felt that Peter was being hypocritical. Whoever put the video of the sermon on YouTube made it public domain.

I don't see anyone assassinating anyone else's character on this thread, simply disagreeing with their actions.

Are we so politically correct that we can't even do that for fear of offending each other?

I'm quite sure that GP wouldn't be offended at our conversation, he'd probably laugh about it. If he wasn't too sensitive to say the things he did in the pulpit PUBLICLY, then I'm not too sensitive to disagree with him publicly.

I don't know GP personally, I"ve met him one time, and played golf with him several years ago. I'm sure he's a good man, and no one implied he was living in sin. However, public actions beg for public discussion, and as long as we limit our conversation to the actions, and not impugn the actor's character, we are not violating any scripture, that I know of.

Yes, knowing GP, he would probably laugh about it.

[Charnock]

I have a hard time feeling sympathy for Rob and his guest speaker.

Rob holds nothing back. He has no problem going after "emergents" and other variants privately and online.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Yes, knowing GP, he would probably laugh about it.

When I pastored, I had monthly board meetings. My board of elders was comprised of four men that I trusted, who would tell me the truth, even if I didn't like it. The last order of business each month was me asking if they had any concerns.

And, sometimes they did.....apparently, I may have said something that offended this person, or that person, or they weren't sure about some things I'd preached,whatever.....and, to be honest, there were times I thought the concerns were petty, and I told them so.......but, sometimes I realized, "Wow, I didn't realize how that came off......." and I would apologize from the pulpit.

Anyway, its my opinion that if you want to get better, you have to open yourself up for critique...sometimes deserved, sometimes undeserved.....but, it should always make you think.

I doubt seriously that GP would ever read anything written here by myself, or anyone else......but, if he does.......maybe, just maybe he'll realize how it comes off to the outsider......

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

When I pastored, I had monthly board meetings. My board of elders was comprised of four men that I trusted, who would tell me the truth, even if I didn't like it. The last order of business each month was me asking if they had any concerns.

And, sometimes they did.....apparently, I may have said something that offended this person, or that person, or they weren't sure about some things I'd preached,whatever.....and, to be honest, there were times I thought the concerns were petty, and I told them so.......but, sometimes I realized, "Wow, I didn't realize how that came off......." and I would apologize from the pulpit.

Anyway, its my opinion that if you want to get better, you have to open yourself up for critique...sometimes deserved, sometimes undeserved.....but, it should always make you think.

I doubt seriously that GP would ever read anything written here by myself, or anyone else......but, if he does.......maybe, just maybe he'll realize how it comes off to the outsider......

I can agree with you, Michael - IF - the critique is coming from someone/anyone - insider/outsider - who holds your best interest at heart and not simply because they want to pick - like a buzzard.