On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 09:08:19 EST [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How about just discussing the validity of the
teaching in question?
You can't do that without insulting the
person or the teaching itself?
jt: Why not? We should be able
to be Berean here which is to compare different teachings alongside the Word of
God
How does one insult
a teaching it is either true or false and if false it needs to be
brought to the light. If a person holding on
to it as truth is insulted then they
are holding on too tightly and it is a chance to let go. Only truth
will stand in that day.
I count only four contributors on this forum
who apprently can't comply. 4 out of 14 contributors --
obviously it can be done.
And you don't overlook anything considered negative. Nothing. John
And you don't overlook anything considered negative. Nothing. John
jt: Comply with what John? Is
there some kind of rule book I don't know about? jt
In a message dated 1/18/2005 5:10:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is my opinion - that this moderation thing is getting too oppressive. When it becomes impossible to dialogue with another person without
constant nit picking about ad hominems then communicating becomes more of a burden than a joy.. Is it really necessary? There was no question about ad hominem when G accused me of writing on an 8th grade level. which is both personal and unflattering along with the ongoing cult and myth accusations...Is my referring to Lance's incarnation doctrine one time worse than all that? Hey! I can overlook some things - in fact I would rather overlook things myself than live with this constant scrutiny. Could we save it for crisis situations?
