John wrote: > How many times did I correct Judy prior to my complaint? Once.
I received Judy's first post with the "comfortable in sin" phrase on March 27, 2005 at 2:57 pm. On March 28, 2005 at 8:19 am, I received a post from you where you declared that Judy had completely rejected the gospel. You said that she had no clue about faith being reckoned as righteousness and that she was ever knowing and never learning. On the same day, I received a post from Judy at 11:52 am where she explains how she is not comfortable with sin and that something is wrong with the concept of being comfortable in sin. She explained that a person is doubleminded if he thinks himself to be righteous while at the same time is comfortable with sin. On 1:01 pm on the same date, I received a post from you where you started to complain about her phrase "comfortable in sin." You declared Judy to be dishonest and to be someone with whom you did not want to continue a discussion. John wrote: > If you can count to five, you will have a chance at getting the right > answer Count again, John. John wrote: > Judy Taylor uses three very specific words and in > this order "comfortable with sin." Where did she > get this specific wording? > Hint: from a post I had sent to Terry before Judy stuck > her nose into the thread. She is using my very words -- > quoting, if you will. If she was using your very words, then why are you complaining? She did not use your specific words. She read your phrase about being comfortable with a person keeping their sin and she abbreviated it to the idea of a person being comfortable with sin and a person being comfortable in sin. Her logic to do so was fine, but at this point, you felt that your position was being misrepresented, but more than that, you started accusing her of misquoting you. You keep vascilating back and forth from arguing that she used your very words to arguing that she misquoted you. You can't have it both ways, John. John wrote: > How many times does one have to ignore and offer > correction before the other becomes obvious in his/her > offensive behavior? I'm sure Judy is wondering this the same as I do. How long do we ignore and offer correction toward you before you become obvious in your offensive behavior? I would say we need to be upfront and speak what is on our minds. In other words, stop ignoring. Correct in the spirit of love and meekness. John wrote: > Why has she refused to acknolwdge her "misunderstanding?" > I find it nowhere in print. Because as it has now become clear, she is not misunderstanding. Judy has exposed the deception under which you and Gary are operating. John wrote: > Why have you, David, decided to waste time in dealing > with an issue that is of no ultimate merit? There is ultimate merit in this issue. First, there is the merit of understanding the truth. Second, there is the sister who has been attacked and deserves some defense when she is in the right. Third, there is the problem of self deception that needs to be exposed in you. Fourth, judgment comes upon those who bear false witness and offends one of these little ones. Therefore, it behooves us to warn them of their error if per chance God gives them opportunity to repent. John wrote: > I have a right to complain of misrepresentation and > misquotation if that is what I think took place. Of course you do, but if you are shown to be mistaken and you cannot prove that she misquoted you, then you need to apologize for the false accusation. John wrote: > I have a right to continue in that complaint when the > offending person refuses to acknowledge my several > explanations. There should be a limit to how often you continue to complain. At some point, both have spoken their mind. Also, when you are shown to be in the wrong, you should be humble enough and gracious enough to admit it (especially when you are harping about grace so much!). John wrote: > I have (perhaps) a duty to continue the complaint when the > offender selects a phrase from my post, divests that phrase > from the written and immediate context, and pursues her/his > negativity. You should perhaps consider that you are perpetuating the negativity by not hearing this dear Christian sister. If you agree with Judy's uncomfortableness with sin, then you should be agreeing with her expression of this instead of being offended because she understands your comfortableness with the rigtheous keeping their sin as being abhorrent. Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
