Even in this last post, you engage in foolish talk, using phrases like
"Daddy David" and "Thanks, pal" and "white knight." Such conveys an
attitude of trying to humiliate me the way some men try and win debate by
emotional appeal rather than logic. This is divisive and not something
which engenders friendship.
If you want to continue this thread concerning how you treat us as enemies,
I think we should take this private.
It was your condenscending style that prompted my sarcasm. If I have introduced 100 differing theological points over the past months, you have disagreed with 98 or 99 of them. You don't like being put down -- neither do I. Taking it private? You know my address. But don't even start if you don't intend on being serious with solving the problem. I will be glad to hash it out with you for as long as it takes. To imagine that you would spend enough time telling me why you were not going to "explain" unless and until I asked like Lance does -- all in the name of a shorter post -- taking more time to make this argument than it would have taken to have actually given me a more explanation reveals a degree of insincerety. You want to treat grown men like children, expect the Daddy David from me. You just said we were pals, didn't you? So what was wrong with that line. You want to come charging into an ongoing discussion pretending that you are protecting the fair yound maiden, expect the White Knight label. Beats "blasphemous" and a whole host of other extremely negative comments coming from your script.
Before I sign off -- I do want to make it clear that I am not angry in the slightest. The little jabs were my version of tongue-in-cheek and should have been taken that way. Such has been your explanation in the past. Such is mine now. You need to understand, David, that you are in league with a number of very well informed individuals. They have studied as much or more than you. Their personal ministries are perhaps as involved. None of us need to be treated as if we are dishonest, children in need of corrective measure, or transient Saints. At some point, there have been "spirited" discussion between myself and Jonathan, Slade, Jeff and Gary. Today, I feel very comfortable with these guys. And I think they have a measure of respect for me. Whatever problems were there have been resolved without us necessarily agreeing with each other. You and I? It has not changed at all. Am I the only one you have problems with? Not on your life -- whether in this forum or somewhere else. And the reason it follows you is because you confuse the resulting "suffering" with that of the cross of Christ. I mean, when you choose to argue over the difference of "assertion" verses "explanation," well, it is obvious that you are not even trying -- or as my mother used to say -- that you are very trying !!!
I want to respect you, David. You have much much to offer -- but not as a prophet of God to the waistland that is called the Mind of Smithson. I have been fully accepted by God for at least 47 years, now. Not once has he debated me in the way you do. Not once has He treated me with same lack of respect as you. Not once. Do you not remember just how pro-David Miller I once was? I Defended you and took a great deal of abuse for that defense. And, for a while, the idiot followed me to this forum. And look where we are today. How does one who was quite taken with you -- that would be me -- get on your wrong side? Keep saying that it is all Smithson's fault and you will never know.
What has happen, David, is this: you lost a good and loyal friend, one who was willing to go to bat for you and you don't give a crap. Actually, NOW, I am a little angry.
The ball is in your court. It's Miller time. What will you do with it?
J
