Re: [TruthTalk] Restoration versus condemnation-David Miller

[Dave Hansen]

I opened up by apologizing for using a term that someone else thought was an ad-hom, and Dave took full advantage of the opportunity to deride me about it for several days. DAVEH:   Sounds like you might be hallucinating again, Perry.  While my memory certainly isn't as sharp as it used to be, I do not recall giving you a bad time at all over the sly comment after you apologized.  Now like I said, it could be my failing memory.....or, it could be you are trying to deceive others into believing you are the victim here.  Since it is impossible to prove a negative, I'll leave it up to you to post my comments about you using sly subsequent to your apology.  I don't think they exist, and if they do....I'll owe and give you a sincere apology.  But.....they don't exist, because I didn't do it.  If you can't produce such derision after your apology about the sly comment, then I think we can assume you've made that one up.       Now....I will suggest perhaps one consideration.   There is a chance that I sent out a post within a few hours of your apology, if I had not first read your apology before my post.  And...it could be that you read my previous posts subsequent to your apology.  There is certainly a few hours of overlapping times that could account for both of our recollections being somewhat correct.  However.....I didn't beat you up for days over it.....that's just plain not true.  Once you apologized, it was over as far as I was concerned.  I'll leave it to you to prove otherwise.     As for your sensitivity to being the butt of jokes.....that's your problem, Perry.  When you chose to take a hardline attack on my faith, what did you expect?   Did you think I would just sit back and dodge your arrows forever with no response?  I may be old, slow and naively stupid at some things....but, I figure that if you toss a barb at me, I might as well return it since it seems you've lost it!      Furthermore.....What are you doing in TT if you are so sensitive?  You've certainly not felt restrained in denigrating my beliefs.  Let's just give you the benefit of the doubt and imagine that you are blind to your own faults on that one.   But.....Where is your sensitivity when others denigrate my beliefs?   Are you blind to that as well?  If you are aware of what really happens on TT, then I would think your skin is thick enough to stand a little sarcasm.     As for apologizing to you and/or Dean.....when you or Dean can show me where I've accused you wrongly, then I'll humbly apologize.  But....I see no need to offer an apology when deceit is used against me. Charles Perry Locke wrote: Dave once falsely accused me of something, I forget what. I asked for an apology. he failed to do so. Because of his tactics I called him "sly" and was called to apologize for calling Dave "sly" by another on the group. I did. Then Dave turned right around and beat me up for days because I called him "sly", not once apologizing for the injustice that he had served on me, thus proving that he is hostile, sly, and untrustworthy, an opportunist, and willing to kick a Christian whan he is down. I opened up by apologizing for using a term that someone else thought was an ad-hom, and Dave took full advantage of the opportunity to deride me about it for several days. People like that do not have enough of my respect to get by with implying that I am a drug user, even in gest. I would even suggest that Dave apoligize to Dean and myself, but he has proven in the past that he is too proud to do that.   So, while you may think it is funny to see poor, tasteless and unwelcome humor directed at someone other than yourself, those on the recieving end may not. Perry -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.