And so from your lofty perch up there (in what Kevin
calls Canukustan) you are going to pronounce judgment
and tell us who had it "together?". How you (and
he) justify such behavior is beyond me, no matter what the
technicalities; especially since even a child is known
by his behavior. jt
Last kick at the cat (sorry Iz). You are,
untintentionally, too too funny sometimes. (I know he had no idea what I was
talking about most of the time) El reverso, Judith. I was thee who had no idea
what HE was talking about most of the time. He said so. Go back and look if
you're interested.
For a mature believer "being ticked off" is no
reason for lack of love and/or rudeness. It's possible Slade
may
have misunderstood some things; I know he had no
idea what I was talking about most of the time. The
answer to his predicament would have been to say
goodbye and quietly retire into his studies and home life.
The way he acted did not exhibit one bit of
grace. jt
I do believe that Slade was more than a
little ticked off with David and, understandably so IMO.
I don't think it funny Lance; I think it
is extremely rude, to listmembers and most expecially to the
listowner
with whom he had some kind of an agreement
which was broken and nullified and that without notice. If
nothing else he broke the Royal Law - Love
which I am sure would have an equivalent in the Talmud.
jt
Was that an 'unintended funny'? 'broken
one of the Talmudic laws'. Good one, Judith!
You can't know the
heart Lance other than what proceeds from the mouth and by their own
admission this is
how they (Slade and Kay) perceived the
way God would have them walk even though it is far from NT
Christianity.
I believe they were both well meaning but
to this day can not comprehend why Slade
would take on moderation
of this list with so much on his plate
ie work, study, 8 children at home
and a part time working wife. I was not
surprised at his abrupt exit, only by the
way they left with noone sure whether or not they
were sad, glad, or
mad - All we were sure of was that
they were gone... That had to have broken one or
more of the Talmudic
Laws. jt
I've recently been in touch with
Slade via Kay. You misspeak, methinks, Judith. You do so not vis a
vis the Talmudic reference but as to his non legalistic heart. I
watched him as a moderator.As to the Millers deux, I have naught
against either.
From: Judy Taylor Not so. Slade was more legalistic than David
Miller by a long shot; anyone who tries to keep the 10
Commandments by observing the 613 man made laws of the Talmud IMO
is excessively legalistic. How is it your comprehension is
so partial Lance? Methinks you
show a definite negative bias toward both DM and his sweet
daughter Christine. jt
David: Would you care to tell us,
as list administrator, why you believe that the last two
moderators, Gary and Slade, bit the dust? Both, by the by,
were non-legalists were they not?
Ok, guys, this makes it clear that a new moderator is
in order. For some reason, Gary won't correspond with
me, so I am taking action unilaterally for the sake of the
list.
Perry has agreed to take over as moderator again.
I appreciate the time Gary has put into the job. The
job is now Perry's.
The idea of a moderator is that he is the only person
who will be speaking toward the person on the list. He
will try to help the rest of us stay on topic and stay away
from personal attacks. Let's please comply with his
judgments. Thanks.
David Miller
List Administrator
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, May 27,
2005 10:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Bulk]
Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Fond Farewells- Salvation
Apparently. -----Original
Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To:
TruthTalk@mail.innglory.orgSent:
Fri, 27 May 2005 22:18:56 EDT Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re:
[Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Fond Farewells- Salvation
In a message dated 5/27/2005 7:55:41 PM Mountain
Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
What was your message to Deegan
when he called me a liar? Liar is ok -- nuts
is off limits?
Blaine: I think Kevin has arrived at the
"can-do-no-wrong" stage of membership in TT.
:>)
|