Linda Shields posts some thoughts not received by me except in this post from Lance.
Are you "pro-wife?" Would you do nothing to provide and protect her and her honor? Do you really think that my "pro-David Miller" stance was anthing different -- that I really meant to imply that I honor you to the exclusion of my reverence for Jesus Christ Himself? "Pro David" never implied, to me, that I set you [or anyone] on some kind of pedestal. It can be argued, conversely, that your notion that you occupy the office of Prophet on a pare with "Apostles and Prophets" is an effort to accomplish this very thing -- "pedestal reverence" for David. Of course, none of us would make that argument -- but I have seen it presented by others.
Sadly your wounded ego is hanging out here again, JD. (We Greek âdualistsâ refer to that as the âfleshâ I have learned J ) David, I believe, is simply stating that he doesnât want you to agree with him (take his side) motivated by friendship. He wants you to stand for truth regardless of personalities. Itâs that simple. That means you should not expect to be rewarded by the person with whom you agreed, but by God. Otherwise you have no reward but the âfriendshipâ of man. (A very poor substitute.) For that you have, again, blasted him. Izzy
That last sentence tells me that you did not read carefully my words. No one is blasting David in the above. I am fully capable of such -- but not on this occasion. David expressed a corrective concern that was not necessary -- reminding me that my rever should be in God and not man. In so doing, he completely missed the point of "friendship" as I (and most, I must add) consider friendship. It is David who resists being set on a pedestal. It is Linda who disagrees with David. I am in full agreement while finding that this "correction" had nothing to do with my thinking. I seriously doubt that David felt any offense in my wording. I would be surprised to hear differently.
John
