Glad to see you take the "high road" John.
So does this mean there will be no more personal
comments from your end? jt
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:32:13 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As in my first response of the morning, I will deal with some personal issues if the over all post has to do with real issues. The following does not - it is entirely personal. Side bar it or forget it. No one on this list wants to read a protracted debate on personal matters. We all (me inlcuded) m\need to move away from this kind of discussion. I, for one, will try once again. JD
In a message dated 1/14/2005 12:34:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:01:20 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
jt: It's bad enough that Bill first insults and then cuts and runs whenever his worldview is threatened. Invariably you jump in right away to rub a bit of salt in the wound - What gives you the idea that you know all these things (ie: who I am here to learn from) John?... jt
I've been reading your postings for nearly a year, that's how I know.
jt: More accurately - you've been reading things into my postings for nearly a year and you don't know what you think you know.
Did I miss speak when I said that Judy does not intend to learn from the likes of "you and me?"
jt: Yes.
According to you, I (and Bill) am wrong on every single major Christian doctrine in the book and then you whine about me criticing you. Incredible.
jt: You read the whine into what I wrote which is not kind John and then you make these great sweeping statements. If these so called
"major Christian doctrines" conflict with the clear teaching of God's Word then I would have a problem with them. What is truth for you?
When there is conflict do these take precedence?
