A bit of site housekeeping
Folks, I'm going to give you one heads-up, and one heads-up only.
The notion here is to deal with issues, and not with personalities--unless, obviously, a personality makes himself (or herself) an issue.
Whether it's an obvious bit of nonsense like calling someone a "moonbat" or a "sissy," or more subtly-phrased disparagements, there will be no more of them. At least, not here.
I've been tolerant, but as is often the case, my tolerance has been taken for granted. Talk about events and ideas, not about people, or your comments, too, will be eligible to join the "Remove Forever" club.
--Mike
308 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 308 of 308Silence...tacit agreement...ya just gotta love it...
:)
Just sayin'.
oc.
::crickets chirping:: wow, its gotten quiet in here lol.
Oh. You know what??? This is just too bizarre. I quit. Open Season. Let her rip. See ya !!!
You left one bleeding to die...
You left one bleeding to die...
YOU LEFT ONE BLEEDING TO DIE...
you left one bleeding to die...
Hey blog...even though you don't like him....Still...you left one in in the field...bleeding to die.
Congratulations. The world has had a peek at your...uh...courage. Or lack thereof. And you have the ...nerve... to constantly insist that all should post their names.
With friends like you...
Even snipers have some sense of honor.
Just sayin'.
oc.
OC...
Mary Ellen is calling you....
just sayin...
gmommy,
I hear her. I'm gone.
OC, what and who are you talking about?
Hey Mike, with your wrestling background, were you as excited as me to see the return of American Gladiators????
Memphis,
Is the new American Gladiators as "wrestly" as it looks on the commercials? I really loved watching the old one but this one has the feeling it might be more into the storylines and characters instead of just good old fashioned jousting with giant Q-tips....
Larry ol' pal,
You've got mail.
Jessica B. said...
Memphis,
Is the new American Gladiators as "wrestly" as it looks on the commercials? I really loved watching the old one but this one has the feeling it might be more into the storylines and characters instead of just good old fashioned jousting with giant Q-tips....
3:20 PM, January 07, 2008
Actually, I watched it. It didn't seem any different from the original Gladiators. The wrestling feel your getting I think just comes from Hulkamania runnin wild on the show.
And Charlie...whatcha gonna do....whatcha gonna do when Hulkamania runs wild on you!!!!?!?!?
The games are more interesting, like that soft pyramid with the gristle men up top to throw down the contenders.
Oh, it's gladiator time. That's real important in the Christian world, ain't it? But it's funny that when it was time for the "gladiator" spirit to emerge, it was severely lacking around here.
Just sayin'.
oc.
But it's funny that when it was time for the "gladiator" spirit to emerge, it was severely lacking around here.
That's not what's funny. What's really funny is how a certain Christlike man, who's been nothing but an encouragement to me and others, was condemned as arrogant, prideful, and condescending on a certain other blog. And why? Just because he tried to offer encouragement to a new blogger.
Perhaps it seems alien to people who are so self centered that they don't know that there's a world beyond their own noses, but other people have feelings too. Everyone has their own unique trials and difficulties. On their bad days they don't need people they consider friends to talk down to them. The NBBCOF failed a brother in a hard time, but that's no surprise to me. They constantly slam me, my family, and my friends, so why would I be surprised that they attack someone else?
Woe to the poor pitiful women who are so unfairly oppressed by the SBC, but if a man is hurt by the ugly remarks of the women on the NBBCOF he's just too sensitive. Right?
So here's hoping certain blogs keep their gladiator spirit. And that other's keep their Christian spirit. It'll all work out in the end.
Keith says:
That's not what's funny. What's really funny is how a certain Christlike man, who's been nothing but an encouragement to me and others, was condemned as arrogant, prideful, and condescending on a certain other blog. And why? Just because he tried to offer encouragement to a new blogger.
The NBBCOF failed a brother in a hard time, but that's no surprise to me. They constantly slam me, my family, and my friends, so why would I be surprised that they attack someone else?
oc says:
No, what's really funny is this. Who was that? And who slammed you and your family? I really want to see that. Show it to me. And I want real evidence, not whining.
Waiting for it.
By the way. You sure left Brady naked, didn't you? Silence is tacit agreement, isn't it? Honor, got some?
oc.
Keith,
I have to go along with OC on this one. I searched the whole comment section on the other blog for "prideful", "arrogant" and "condecending" and they didn't show up anywhere.
Are these words they used or words you used to describe your take on it?
We all watched the silence. The silence that you yourself meant "tacit agreement". Which ended as a sentence for one of yours. No one spoke up for him. You left him in the field. And you were the one silent. Very telling.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Keith Solomon says:
Woe to the poor pitiful women who are so unfairly oppressed by the SBC, but if a man is hurt by the ugly remarks of the women on the NBBCOF he's just too sensitive. Right?
oc says:
Oh my goodness. I just can't let this one go. Grow some, sensitive boy. Testosterone may helpeth you.
just sayin'.
oc.
ez,
It's both. GM said Larry always acts 'superior' when nothing could be further from the truth. I assume you've never met him, or else you'd be in agreement with me. This 'bookworm' person shows up and starts ranting about the evils of the "PDL Church" and so on so she's instantly preferred over someone who's proven himself to be the real deal. Ridiculous. I hope that you're willing to say a quick prayer for him today, even though he doesn't share all of your views. Although he's left Bellevue (and I haven't), me and my family are willing to encourage him. Why is it that the 'faithful' who have also left won't?
And OC, why in the world would you think that anyone here would defend Brady?!? Just because you don't like him doesn't mean he's 'one of us'. He posts more on the NBBCOF (and the FBC JAX blog) than he does here. I'd think you should be the one defending him, not me. You're the one who abandoned your comrade, not anyone here.
I agree with him that anyone who makes allegations against another person by name should reveal their own name, but not much else he's said. I certainly don't approve of his choice of words, but I think his call for courage instead of cowardice has merit.
Oh golly. Gag. Metro-whatever.
Just sayin'.
oc.
oc said...
Oh golly. Gag. Metro-whatever.
Just sayin'.
oc.
10:29 PM, January 08, 2008
OC,
Since you're not making much sense, I'll resume giving your posts the attention I feel they deserve.
None.
You've never answered my challenge from last month, and I won't have anything else to say to you until you do.
Of course, if you'd like to defend or denounce your statement about me and my family being a "bunch of heartless and gutless people masquerading as people of God" I'd be willing to listen to what you have to say.
Until then, I won't address you further.
9:03 PM, December 18, 2007
And that's a promise.
Sol says:
Just because you don't like him doesn't mean he's 'one of us'.
oc says:
I don't blame you. I would work real hard at getting him out of the family too. He's an embarrassment, huh? The "lesser" brother? No wonder ya'll didn't rush to his aid.
And just because YOU don't like him and you refuse to claim him means what????? Maybe says more about you than him.
And just cuz you don't like him, doesn't mean he doesn't belong to you either.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Solomon says:
Of course, if you'd like to defend or denounce your statement about me and my family being a "bunch of heartless and gutless people masquerading as people of God" I'd be willing to listen to what you have to say.
oc says:
I would love to see where I said anything about your family. Lay it out, or shut up.
Do it now.
Solomon says:
Until then, I won't address you further
oc says:
Yep. Man of your word. Adressing me now, ain't ya?
Just sayin'.
oc.
Solomon said:
Of course, if you'd like to defend or denounce your statement about me and my family being a "bunch of heartless and gutless people masquerading as people of God" I'd be willing to listen to what you have to say.
Until then, I won't address you further.
oc says:
come up with it. I would love to see it, and defend it if necessary. Go ahead. I'm sick of hearing about the whining from you and mike.
You both prove it.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Where is it?
Is this one of those "silence is tacit agreement" things????
I would really love to see where I insulted your family. I know that I would never do that. Family is sacred. So I am confident that you are at least mistaken.
So your cajones rest there.
So I'm waiting.
Just sayin'.
oc.
This is getting sad guys. You have said your peace to each other.
Be the bigger man and ignore every attempt of someone trying to argue with you, it is obvious there is just a need to start things and get reactions from you, becasue that seems to give them great joy.
Let your words give life...
Memphis,
I've said nothing against anyone's family. So I won't sit here and be told otherwise. Can you find that I have said anything about anyone's family? If you can, I will go away. Otherwise, people are doing their best to lie.
Convince them to be truthful, not me. I'm not going to be the liar.
Just sayin.
oc.
And as by your own pronouncement.
Silence is tacit agreement.
So I guess you are right, in a weak way. But better, so am I.
Just sayin'.
So glad to play the game according to your rules....and still win.
Just sayin' again...
oc.
I've heard that silence is tacit agreement.
just sayin'.
oc.
I would really know where I said anything against your family. So I can know it and repent. So show me, so I can move to repentence. I'm serious Keith. If I need to repent, I will.
Just sayin'.
oc.
I've heard this:
Silence is tacit agreement.
Is it true???
I'm waiting to defend your accusation, if you can even come up with one. If you can't answer, I guess it's a matter of your motto "silence is tacit agreement". So I'll assume that you agree with me.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Silence. Good. Tacit agreement. Guess we are done. So, if you want to make an accusation against me in the future, just know that you will have to prove it, and not just spew it.
See ya.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Keith,
I think that if you will look back, I have encouraged Larry on several occasions. And yes, I will pray for him.
At the end of the day, he isn't facing anything that the rest of us aren't. It is called testing....
Zech 13:9
And I will put this third into the fire,
and refine them as one refines silver,
and test them as gold is tested.
They will call upon my name,
and I will answer them.
I will say, They are my people;
and they will say, The Lord is my God.
1 Peter 4: 12 Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. 13 But rejoice insofar as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.
James 1:12 Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him.
Psalms 7:9
Oh, let the evil of the wicked come to an end,
and may you establish the righteous—
you who test the minds and hearts,
O righteous God!
Testing, that is all....and to think some folks tell us it is easy.....
Are you guys finding it easy?
Keith,
As to bkwormgirl, I don't consider her post "ranting" and it appears to me that she is reading and searching for truth. I think if you look back at her posts, you will find the same.
It is uncharacteristic of you to condemn the attention Larry got with his post but then turn around and do the same or more to bkwormgirl with your post. She deserves every bit as much support as Larry does. Lets support them both!
ez,
I was going by what had been shared with me by another person, and I see that I was mistaken about 'bkwormgirl'. I was told that she was another anti-Bellevue type, but she's not.
I went back through the thread, and I saw that not only you but several other bloggers shared words of encouragement. I don't believe that kind words are ever in vain, so I feel better about what happened.
Regarding trials, yes we all face them regularly and during those tests we are faced with the dilemna of whether we'll respond in faith or not. I've found that it's much easier to keep the faith when there's a Barnabas standing alongside me instead of having Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar 'in my face' telling me what all I'm doing wrong.
I hope that you and the other level headed regulars continue to offer words of support to anyone who posts 'over there', whether their needs are obvious or not. We're living in the real world, and no one has it all together.
Keith
I went back through the thread, and I saw that not only you but several other bloggers shared words of encouragement. I don't believe that kind words are ever in vain, so I feel better about what happened.
oc says:
It's good that you did so. I gave encouragement also, though you may have chosen not to have noticed that.
But I'm glad it made you "feel better", since it seems that's what it's all about.
And I'm still waiting to see how I disparaged your family (Which I truly believe that I did no such thing) in order that I may repent if that is warranted.
Serious.
Or that you might apologize for yet another mistaken assumption.
Serious also.
oc.
PS. If I don't hear from you, I will consider that just as you like it... "silence is tacit agreement" and I will therefore consider it as being your apology to me. Sorry as it is.
A few things:
1) Either be clear with the soap opera getting posted around here, or take it to e-mail. And that specifically means you, OC.
2) This...
And Mike further says:
The issue is a spiritual one, not an ethical one, so please don't try to remake it into something where you feel you have a legitimate ability to offer "former insider" commentary.
oc says:
Hmmm. You think that the ethical and the spirtual don't inter-twine?
...is a perfect example of the "what he really said" school of misdirection. What I was referencing, had you had the wherewithal to ask rather than attack, was the shortcomings of human ethics to address issues of spiritual import. The context of my statement made that more than slightly apparent.
3) One charity match does not a "wrestling background" make (heh heh), but yes, I'm more than a bit interested in the new iteration of American Gladiators. However, if they begin to echo the WWE template with it, my interest will evaporate.
--Mike
Mike:
1). No soap opera. You and someone else accused me of something, I called you both on it, and you didn't come through. I am nothing but satisfied at this point. The silence on that, I accept as "tacit agreement".
2)misdirection? You give me way too much credit, Mike. It was honest. I still think "ethics" and "spiritual import" relate. Am I wrong?
Pardon me, for I am but ignorant.
3) Huh?
oc said...
Mike:
1). No soap opera. You and someone else accused me of something, I called you both on it, and you didn't come through. I am nothing but satisfied at this point. The silence on that, I accept as "tacit agreement".
Specifics, please. I'm not following what it is I'm to have "accused" you of, or of having been "called" on it.
2)misdirection? You give me way too much credit, Mike. It was honest. I still think "ethics" and "spiritual import" relate. Am I wrong?
Pardon me, for I am but ignorant.
Your self-assessment is disingenuous, I gather, but your belligerence is getting repetitive.
Do you feel that human ethics have a one-for-one equivalence with spiritual maturity?
--Mike
Mike, you are being very defensive.
Specifics? Okay, you and Solomon accuse me of disparaging his family. I did not. I asked for proof of such. Neither one of you provided such.
How much more clear can I be on that?
And you can use the word "disingenuous" all you want. No one is impressed with your word smithing. The word didn't originate with you, although it maybe should have.
I still think that ethics and spiritual import relate closely. Why is that a problem? You need to explain that to me at length. Not just try to get away with sniping me on it.
And because I challenge the "status quo", that's why I am "belligerent"?
Belligerent? Not yet.
oc said...
Mike, you are being very defensive.
Right.
Specifics? Okay, you and Solomon accuse me of disparaging his family. I did not. I asked for proof of such. Neither one of you provided such.
How much more clear can I be on that?
Obviously, I've made no "accusation." Quoting myself thusly and like so:
And with regard to this...
Of course, if you'd like to defend or denounce your statement about me and my family being a "bunch of heartless and gutless people masquerading as people of God" I'd be willing to listen to what you have to say.
...a direct response to it should be at the very heart of the next thing you publish here.
I asked for a "direct response". From what I've seen, you have yet to seriously provide one. Is it your assertion that Keith is lying? Did you, or did you not, make such a statement to him, either publicly or privately?
And you can use the word "disingenuous" all you want. No one is impressed with your word smithing.
Marvelous. I don't write to impress.
The word didn't originate with you, although it maybe should have.
If more folks would "let their yes be yes and their no be no," I'd have much less cause to use that particular word.
I still think that ethics and spiritual import relate closely.
You would be mistaken.
Why is that a problem? You need to explain that to me at length. Not just try to get away with sniping me on it.
Heh heh...
All right, then. Ethics are malleable; one person's ethical behavior is another person's barbarism. For example, there's an "ethicist" by the name of Peter Singer who believes that it's ethical to kill children up to one month after they're born--if the children exhibit symptoms of developmental delay or physical malformation, or are otherwise found by their parents to be undesirable.
Do you agree with Singer, or not? Remember, if you disagree with him, you're trampling upon his ethical standard.
Spiritual issues within the body of Christ appeal to the revealed, objective standard of Scripture, rather than to the subjective "ethical" standards of human beings.
And because I challenge the "status quo", that's why I am "belligerent"?
You don't legitimately "challenge" much of anything, OC. We don't even know your name.
Belligerent? Not yet.
But we do know you like to make schoolyard threats--something I thought you didn't like about yourself, and wanted to address in your personal development. I encourage you to continue to work on curbing your pugilistic impulses.
--Mike
Mike says:
I asked for a "direct response". From what I've seen, you have yet to seriously provide one. Is it your assertion that Keith is lying? Did you, or did you not, make such a statement to him, either publicly or privately?
oc says:
Yes. He sure is lying, and so are you. And it is he and you who are the ones who haven't provided the evidence. The "direct response" is on you, not me. So far, I haven't seen it. If you both can't come up with it, both are liars. You want to talk about "name calling", yet both you and him accuse me? Never have I disparaged his family. I never made such a statement, and you both know it and I think that's
why neither one of you have provided such so called "evidence".
Mike says:
You don't legitimately "challenge" much of anything, OC. We don't even know your name.
oc says:
You know my name. Quite well. So does he. And quit using the "anonimity" thing as a badge of honor. It matters not who hangs their name out here, as you all have shown, it makes no difference. Besides, you aren't the arbiter of legitimacy.
Unless you are now calling yourself "Lord".
Go study your thread statement. Do you have to actually be called a name to be insulted or do you have to just be accused?
Charles,
"Adrian Rogers' theology was the "wine and cheese" while the Calvinism he looked down his nose at was the answer to the man who realizes that he is utterly lost and his condition insurmountable. Election is not a choice."
I don't know about "wine and cheese" theology, but I know pratical theology says that if you don't respect authority of Godly men, then you don't respect the authority of God. (Romans 13:1)
If you will not honor Mikes request to repent; and will not honor his request not to post, how can you claim to live in submission to God? Worse, you use this forum as a venue to advertise the repulsive nonsense you put out on your blog.
You step under his "authority" when you come on his blog.
I know pratical theology tells us what's in your heart is what comes out your mouth. You've filled pages with pornography -- and involving a child at that.
I know that pratical theology tells us that we are not to lie. Yet you were exposed recently as posing to others as a pastor.
I know practical theology tells us to test the spirits. yet you claim to have seen (or heard) visions of Dr. Rogers being forced to watch the pain at Bellevue.
Why not focus on the practical thelogy of repentance, respect and Godliness?
And Charles, Calvinism is not the answer -- the Gospel is the answer.
I see the pattern of why you need to advertise on the Bratton report.
Wine And Cheese Theology
0 comments
Against God's Design - Restore Moral Ability
0 comments
Free Will From Strange Fire Off God's Altar
0 comments
Adrian Rogers owed Bill Clinton an Apology!
0 comments
Was Adrian Rogers a Respectful Bible Teacher?
0 comments
Was Dr. Rogers Roman Catholic or Orthodox?
0 comments
Arminians All Look Alike
0 comments
Yes. He sure is lying, and so are you.
OC,
Let me start by saying that I strongly resent your assault on my integrity. Of course, considering the derogatory nature of your statements against Bellevue, I'm not really surprised.
Since the up arrow on your keyboard seems to be broken, let me recap from earlier in this thread.
Keith solomon said...
OC,
Let me tell you why I get upset. When people say derogatory things about Bellevue, they are talking about me and my family. Yes I take it personally, because it's aimed right at me...
Has anyone ever apologized to me for calling me a disgraceful parent, a pervert, a liberal, and a satanist? No, of course not, and no one ever will.
When you make sweeping statements about Bellevue, you are including me, my family, and everyone else whose membership is still there.
Knowing fully well how I would interpret your put downs, here's your response:
oc says:
ok. You want that I apologize? Did I say that about you?.
I don't think I did. But ok. I apologize. Unless it's true.
10:02 PM, December 16, 2007
A nice gesture on behalf of your cohorts, except for the 'Unless it's true' snipe.
Here's my response to that:
Keith solomon said...
No oc, you weren't the one who said those things. But you seem to be defending those who did.
I will not accept an apology on their behalf for what was said. And I'm going to ignore the 'unless it's true' jab since I don't think you meant it.
10:08 PM, December 16, 2007
After a particularly angry post by 'been redeemed' judging Steve Gaines motives, one of the regulars (gmommy) pointed out that it was a mistake to brand every single man, woman, and child who goes to Bellevue as evil. I shared that here, vainly hoping that her example would have some kind of influence. This was your response, OC:
solomon said:
I noticed gmommy addressed this post by pointing out that it was not right to label the entire congregation as evil.
OC and Lynn, I didn't see your opinions posted over there. Are you going to support gmommy or 'been redeemed'
oc says:
Huh? Now you are complaining that gmommy isn't condemning a whole congregation? I think that is a good thing, don't you? What is it that you want? What is your point?
And yes. I support gmommy and anyone else who needs support against a bunch of heartless and gutless people masquerading as people of God. Whether you like it or not.
11:16 PM, December 16, 2007
So with the full awareness of how I would take your words, you condemned the entire congregation of Bellevue Baptist Church as 'a bunch of heartless and gutless people masquerading as the people of God'. That condemnation includes me, my family, my friends, and a lot of other mighty fine people.
That's my take on it, OC. Either tell me I'm mistaken about what you said or reiterate it. You can't pretend it never happened. That's not an option. It's immortalized for all the world to see, just like whatever you say in response will be.
If you're interested in my advice, if I were you I'd think long and hard before saying anything else. You've already judged the membership of BBC as being worthy of condemnation, and called me a liar when I've done nothing but respond to your posts according to my convictions. I think you should get WAY back in your prayer closet and spend A LOT of time with the Lord.
And after that, answer this:
Who are the heartless and gutless people masquerading as the people of God?
For once, I'll be VERY interested in your answer.
solomon says:
That's my take on it, OC. Either tell me I'm mistaken about what you said or reiterate it. You can't pretend it never happened. That's not an option. It's immortalized for all the world to see, just like whatever you say in response will be.
oc says:
Yes, you are mistaken about some things, and you did quote me correctly. But what made you think that remark was directed at you personally? Did you see yourself in my description of the people who were attacking 'gmommy'? If you didn't, don't sweat it. And I don't know anything about your family. Why would you accuse me of attacking them?
just askin'.
oc.
OC,
I'm completely open to accepting that I mistook what you said. But please be aware that my church has been under attack for a long time.
Back when the pastor jumped the fence and lied from the pulpit, I was one of a small group who protested. I received nothing but ridicule, along with my children.
Some of the people who chastised me for speaking out against the pastor's recklessness have now left and have nothing but hateful words to say about him. And me, too. Talk about darned if I don't, darned if I do.
The bottom line is that I still care a lot about Bellevue. Yes, we have problems, some of them critical, but we WILL overcome them.
If I'm overly sensitive when I read words condemning my church, it's because it's so important to me. It's much bigger than SG, and it will be around long after he's gone.
God planted this church, and He won't desert it because of one man. Or countless men, either.
And you did make a big mistake.
You went on a attack, when it wasn't necessary.
I'm not and never have been in the business of condemning her, I love her too, just from afar, so to speak.
Can you get that, and love me too?
Mike doesn't seem to accept that. Wondered if others could get it.
Just sayin'.
oc.
I think what has been illustrated quite profoundly on the Bratton Report--repeatedly--is the fundemental double-standard implied by the behavior of its participants. This blog has been in the habit of condemning, as a whole cloth, the NBBCOF blog; one, because the basis of its founding is the multiple travesties commited against its members (and I grew up being taught the church was the people, not the real estate); and if certain participants do not offend, they're offensive because they should be policing the comments of others.
Mr. Solomon, I do not believe everyone who still attends Bellevue is to be written off as a bunch of spineless toadies; but it is a question of merit to ask how individuals have resolved real failures and compounded breaches of trust by leadership with what appears to be the buying out of contracts, loyalty oaths and the consolidation of power since those breaches occured. These are not the actions of contrite and regretful leaders, but the scrambling of men to save their careers. There seems to be offense at even the mere utterance of any scrutiny directed to this apparent inconsistency.
It has been established by Mike here that the actions of the Pastor regarding the pedophile scandal are no basis for stakeholders (and i love that term, as opposed to the dismissive tone often intimated regarding people who've "moved on"--i.e. had the welcome mat jerked from beneath them) to openly oppose his continued leadership. This is a logical fallacy--so too is militantly claiming that one stands by the seriousness of this offense, yet seemingly hold no standard of accountability for such, nor seemingly give no quarter for people genuinely devastated by the loss of their church family.
It is inconsistent to constantly hold one group's feet to the fire regarding some comments, so as to seemingly hang on every word, waiting to pounce on the next inflamed or uncareful utterance, only to become quiet as a church mouse when the cast of the Bratton blog engages the very lowbrow tactics and meanness it seeks to expose--all under the pathetic and slovenly argued caveat that this place is, after all, not bound by its own standard since it is not "single issue."
So, when a Brady makes a first class jerk of himself, taunting someone about a certain aspect of their manhood--and on the heels of a pious and exclusionist claim to spiritual supremacy--then I, like OC, have good reason to savor the irony so vividly illustrated by his slinking away like a coward. And not simply Brady, but all the consistently outspoken critics of NBBCOF who slink away from their own pronounced standards of others too.
OC, I think you might not want to be enthralled to drive it home so vigorously. The drop in posts since Brady's dip into ridicule, and the awkward attempts to shange the subject speak for themselves.
Keith,
Something to just consider and think about. I appreciate your loyalty to your church and your need for it.
However, what concerns me is that you have more loyalty to the Word and need Him more than you do BBC. The church just may not be any bigger than the man....but THE CHURCH is.
Don't get caught in the trap that many in Israel did. Search "wood stone" at biblegateway.com and see what turns up. Bellevue is the work of man's hands. It was planted by man. WE are the church, and our loyalty and desires should be to Him and Him alone. To the extent that BBC helps you do that then charge on my loyal friend! Just keep in mind who you fight for and who you love. He has to be first.
Thanks for your post earlier today. We would all be better off if we would try to edify, encourage and build up one another in CHRIST.
Yeah Cakes,
Thanks, and I got it.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Just so that there's no misunderstanding, The Bratton Report has its own distinct membership which Brady is not a regular member of. As I said, he posts just as frequently on the NBBCOF and the FBC Jax blogs as he does here. He's as welcome to contribute as (almost) anyone, but he's not a 'regular'.
Although I'm not able to patrol the posts here 24/7, I do call people on errors sometimes. I'm more concerned with heart attitudes than crude language, spelling errors, and so on. If I'm going to be considered negligent if I don't address this, I will:
Brady said...
If a man doesn't have a personal, living relationship with Jesus he CANNOT understanding the things of the Spirit of God.
Those are God's words--not mine. Pretty well answers I would think. Sorry if it offends some of you.
This statement is not a consensus of opinion here just because it was posted on TBR.
What Brady presented as God's word is actually his own paraphrase of 1Corinthians 2 modified to include the popular catch phrase 'personal relationship with Jesus'. He's entitled to his own interpretation and I don't have a problem with it even though I don't agree with him. Normally I'd pass it by.
Since the Bible teaches that the Spirit provides illumination and not a relationship, Brady seems to be reducing the third member of the Godhead to a relationship. In effect, he's teaching the 'bond of love' view of the Trinity as described by Augustine. That's a theology problem, and I don't really have the time to get into a discussion about every statement I don't accept.
This is different, though:
Those are God's words--not mine. Pretty well answers I would think. Sorry if it offends some of you.
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I don't think Brady is sorry for the offense at all. This is the kind of arrogance that gives Christians a bad reputation. Presenting 'God's words' in a dismissive way in order to inflict offense, and then showing bogus remorse for it has no precedent in the Bible. None that I know of, anyway.
1 Peter 3:15,16
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.
Brady, if you're reading, I don't think that your posts adequately demonstrate the gentleness and certainly not the respect that should exemplify Christians. The purpose of those characteristics is so that anyone who degrades us will be ashamed of their own behavior. They must therefore be the very ones we should show gentleness and respect to.
I trust that in the future you'll refrain from making statements that can justly be used against us.
Mr Solomon,
I find you to be a gentle and kind soul and measured in your tone. I don't wish you or anyone to feel goaded to police the comments of others either. I do not feel I have a responsibility to police the comments of others--merely pointing out that, if one did so, he or she could spend the lion's share of their energy doing so. Yet it sticks out like a sore thumb when some folks will hold that standard upon others, yet blissfully sidestep the same in themselves.
Someoneone calls me an a**, no protests; I say "hell," Mike pounces--his is what I am talking about. Outrage is very selective and observes loyalties here. Whether it is Brady or someone else, the level of outrage is always conditional upon which side is being defended--while substantive debate gets little emphasis. Name-calling, emotional outbursts and posturing do not harm me--it reflects poorly upon the speaker's conciousness, not mine--thus I am not calling for any proscriptions in that regard.
I hope that you will recognize that neither blog is a monolith, pitting one viewpoint against the other, but a myriad of thoughts and beliefs that often conflict with one another in each of their respective locales, thus I cannot hold you responsible for what Mike or WHS says here, nor Gmom or Nass for what Watchman says over at NBBCOF.
As I've said before, all we have in these forums are the words--the effacacy of the arguments stand for themselves, or they are to be the subject if dismissal, revision or approval, nothing more and nothing less. But we cannot give credence to a viewpoint, not matter how inane or reactionary, simply because the "friend of my enemy is my friend," or because he or she shares my antipathy for another faction. It is intellectually and morally unsound to accept such a compromise.
I would hope that you may find people of a kind and gentle nature, like yourself, in the ranks of those alienated from Bellevue--because they do exist--even if you must part ways on the substance of the debate over leadership.
Be well, kind sir, and may your faith strengthen you.
David
Watching,
There is a big difference in being stoned for promoting the Gospel and being stoned for sinning in the camp.
That spirit of delusion you are under is making it impossible for you to ascertain the difference. That doesn't mean that it isn't there...we can see it.
I just pray that God will deliver you from the spirit of delusion and allow you to see the difference as well.
2 Thes 2:11-12
Let's get some of this straightened out...
Keith Solomon said:
Let me start by saying that I strongly resent your assault on my integrity. Of course, considering the derogatory nature of your statements against Bellevue, I'm not really surprised.
oc says:
I didn't assault your integrity. You just flat lied, that's all. Maybe not on purpose, I'm not judging that. But I didn't make you do it. So please show my "derogatory" statements against Bellevue, because that evidence is pertinent to your accusation. And of course I'm talking about any false statements I may have made toward Bellevue.
Solomon says:
Has anyone ever apologized to me for calling me a disgraceful parent, a pervert, a liberal, and a satanist? No, of course not, and no one ever will.
When you make sweeping statements about Bellevue, you are including me, my family, and everyone else whose membership is still there.
oc says:
Dang bro. Who talked about your family? Who called you a disgraceful parent, pervert,satanist, liberal? I have looked and looked, and I don't see that. If I could see where that happened, I would apologize, and if it's not me who said it, I will go back to the "closed forum" and ask that person to repent of that action. And who is making "sweeping statements"?
You seem to be "sweeping" more than a bit yourself.
Just sayin'.
oc.
OC,
I believe that your heart's in the right place, but I'm very tired of talking about the other blog. As I wrote a little earlier,
Keith solomon said...
No oc, you weren't the one who said those things...
10:08 PM, December 16, 2007
Last year I shared a family experience that involved my youngest daughter, hoping to demonstrate how the manner in which people present their opinions can easily turn people away even if they share those opinions. I was broadly condemned and called unpleasant names. I was completely floored by the response, and it was Cakes of all people who helped me realize that using children to make a point will evoke emotional responses, some of which seem irrational. I've refrained from doing it since.
I have no desire to correspond with those who wrote such ridiculous things about me, and I'd rather put the whole experience behind me. No one really meant what they said, so there's nothing to repent of except misguided anger anyway.
OC, while we're on the subject of how we present our opinions, do you think that I could interpret your statement that I 'flat lied' as an insult? The word 'lie' always carries the implication of malicious intent or deliberate deceit. There's a world of difference between stating an incorrect conclusion and deliberately lying.
I already shared the reason I take insults against Bellevue personally, and I'll continue to do so. I don't get upset when people ridicule the Republican party, or make fun of people from Mississippi. Making stereotypical derogatory comments about Bellevue is much more personal, though. I'll continue to take any words about Bellevue (either good or bad) as being aimed directly at me and mine, and my taking them that was is not lying.
Yes, we have problems. Yes, we have pride to overcome. Yes, our pastor has brought us shame and embarrassment. But we are NOT an apostate church. We are NOT a bunch of millionaires who gather on Sundays just to network and compare bank statements. Jesus' name is glorified week after week in our worship services and in the lives of the faithful members, and anyone who says otherwise is seriously mistaken.
I liked what Ezekiel said a little earlier:
There is a big difference in being stoned for promoting the Gospel and being stoned for sinning in the camp.
Jesus prepared his disciples for a lot of hardships, such as being stoned, mocked, and flogged in the synagogues, but nowhere does he prepare them for persecution by fellow Christians. That's something that should never happen. I'm willing to accept correction, rebuke, chastisement, and other things that are unpleasant at the time as good things, but not a steady onslaught of discouragement from people of like faith.
As someone said earlier, since peace isn't possible, we're just going to have to learn to consistently turn the other cheek. We can expect plenty more insults to be fired from both sides, but the only solution is Christ's solution of turning the other cheek.
solomon says:
Last year I shared a family experience that involved my youngest daughter, hoping to demonstrate how the manner in which people present their opinions can easily turn people away even if they share those opinions. I was broadly condemned and called unpleasant names. I was completely floored by the response, and it was Cakes of all people who helped me realize that using children to make a point will evoke emotional responses, some of which seem irrational. I've refrained from doing it since.
oc says:
You say this happened last year? I can't remember the post which evoked such an emotional response, but since you have decided not to do so again, why keep bringing it up? By bringing it up, you are choosing to be insulted all over again. It would be my suggestion to let it go.
And by the way, do you realize how arrogant you sound when you say something like this:
"and it was Cakes of all people"
And yet in the same breath, you want to talk about being insulted.
Man. You complain about being insulted, while you are doing just that to someone else.
You say:
while we're on the subject of how we present our opinions, do you think that I could interpret your statement that I 'flat lied' as an insult? The word 'lie' always carries the implication of malicious intent or deliberate deceit. There's a world of difference between stating an incorrect conclusion and deliberately lying.
oc says:
You are probably right. I admit, I don't know your intention. But calling it an "incorrect conclusion" makes it none the less insulting, don't you think? Even done in ignorance, since the conclusion is not true, doesn't it make it thereby false? And is falsehood but a lie?
But ok. For the sake of peace. Incorrect conclusion.
And as far as Bellevue?
It's the leadership. Or lack thereof. I don't need to go into all that, it's well documented and thoroughly discussed. And if you choose to be insulted because people have been telling you that your leadership has failed you, then continue to be insulted. I can't stop you. That's your choice.
Keith, I'm just saying, it seems you want to stay hurt.
Just sayin'.
oc.
OC,
I meant nothing at all when I said 'cakes of all people'. As I've stated previously, he seems to have a much better grasp of grace than many of us. Since he's never mentioned having children I wouldn't have expected him to be able to sympathize as well as he did. Simply stating that he was an unlikely source to help a father realize that a child's innocence evokes strong emotions isn't an insult. If anything, it's a compliment.
If the leadership issues were all that have been discussed I wouldn't argue with them. I'd most likely agree with many of them.
I seldom read the NBBCOF anymore, but I often receive emails from 'concerned friends' asking about the latest scandal being discussed and I also find printed out comments in my chair at the office. Most recently, someone sent me a comment from one of the more benevolent members of the NBBCOF in which she said that the atmosphere on the Bratton Report was un-Christian. Attached to it was an article by John McArthur about false Christianity, bad fruit, and the whole nine yards. At one time I would have posted an angry response against the wrong person, but I just threw it in the garbage this time. I hope that I'm improving, but only time will tell.
I'd like to put it in my past, but since I've identified myself in the conflict it's not going to happen soon. The forces of darkness are going to seize every opportunity to stir up anger and bitterness. One of my personal goals is to not let them use me to do that anymore.
solomon said:
I meant nothing at all when I said 'cakes of all people'. As I've stated previously, he seems to have a much better grasp of grace than many of us. Since he's never mentioned having children I wouldn't have expected him to be able to sympathize as well as he did. Simply stating that he was an unlikely source to help a father realize that a child's innocence evokes strong emotions isn't an insult. If anything, it's a compliment.
oc says:
You know what Keith? I believe you. But you need to be very careful about who you think God can or cannot use to show us Grace. The offense is your assumption. That is exactly the "arrogance" which I was referring to.
Just sayin'.
And as far as your office situation? That's your missionary field. And I really do pray for you as you try to witness in that hostile environment. But don't blame the "other blog" for your office workers damnation. That barb too, is getting very tired.
Do they also read what you write?
Hey,
You'all need to stop picking at each others' scabs--some hills aren't worth dying for.
I knew what Mr Solomon meant. I'm something of a peculiar contributor here--an unapologetic Buddhist amongst Baptists. No harm, no foul.
You know, sometimes if you just say something nice to someone with whom you have conflict--even if you trying to convince yourself--hearts soften and our differences won't define relationships.
Sometimes the best we can do is say nothing.
I encourage you to find the good in one another.
Keith,
Just an afterthought...
you said:
"The forces of darkness"
Would that be me...or just my wicked friends???
Just askin'.
oc.
You know, it doesn't really matter. Keith, truce bro. And blessings to you.
oc.
Watching,
Seriously. Get help. Get it soon.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Uh, when I say anything "adversarial".
(sp)? response is pretty quick here. When I propose peace, it gets very quiet. I'm trying not
to analyze, it's just my counselor junk you know...I'm just saying that something maybe isn't right with that. Just sayin'.
You don't rush towards peace.
Why?
Just sayin' again.
oc.
Solomon said...
"Yes, we have problems. Yes, we have pride to overcome. Yes, our pastor has brought us shame and embarrassment. But we are NOT an apostate church. We are NOT a bunch of millionaires who gather on Sundays just to network and compare bank statements. Jesus' name is glorified week after week in our worship services and in the lives of the faithful members, and anyone who says otherwise is seriously mistaken."
Lynn asks...
If you do feel that Gaines has dishonored and brought shame to Bellevue, why haven't you gotten rid of him yet? It would be common sense that if someone in a leadership position brought that much shame and embarassment, you would toss him out on his keester without a golden parachute.
Ezekial said: "There is a big difference in being stoned for promoting the Gospel and being stoned for sinning in the camp.
That spirit of delusion you are under is making it impossible for you to ascertain the difference. That doesn't mean that it isn't there...we can see it.
I just pray that God will deliver you from the spirit of delusion and allow you to see the difference as well."
WHS: Do you feel that you maybe generalizing and overstepping with your broad judgemental brush?
Aren't you being presumptuous and taking liberties with the Word of God?
Do you think God’s word originated with you Ezekial? Are you the only one to whom it was given? If you claim to be spiritual, you should recognize that I have been posting from an open Bible, but if you do not recognize this, you yourself will not be recognized.
I believe I know you better than you know yourself. “Any kingdom divided by civil war is doomed." A city divided against itself will fall apart. You think you and your little band of believers are the only camp "promoting the Gospel."
And your camp thinks that the rest of the city is "sinning in the camp." Then rest assured the city, with all it's camps, will fall into the hands of Satan.
If I come with my calvinism posting that we are all sinners saved by God's grace and election, will you insist that your camp are the only saved ones? Won't everyone see your obvious pretensions. Won't you be the one suffering delusion?
Can we see the kingdom gf God comming into the city and the city binding Satan with ropes and while he writhes on the floor we plunder his house together?
No, we'll remain divided and Satan will conquer and we'll remain in our camps entrenched in delusion which you seem to be the expert about.
I plan on being stoned for Christ, Ezekial!
Charles
Wow. Nice censorship, some of us saw what you just did, Mike.
Since you decided to
"exclude" some comments...
I will say it again. We can say "ass", but you censor "hell"?
I plan on being stoned for Christ, Ezekial!
Charles
oc says:
Uh huh. I am certain you are stoned. But don't drag Christ into it.
Just sayin'.
oc.
Lynn asks...
If you do feel that Gaines has dishonored and brought shame to Bellevue, why haven't you gotten rid of him yet? It would be common sense that if someone in a leadership position brought that much shame and embarassment, you would toss him out on his keester without a golden parachute.
oc says:
Since "blog daddy" decided to censor my comment, with no warning nor warrant, for some reason not explained... I will say it again...
wow Lynn. I thought I was the hard ass. I can say "ass", right? That's acceptable here, but "hell" isn't. Go figure.
Just sayin'.
oc.
I'm asking now Mike. Why are you now censoring ME?
My comments just suddenly "disappear", and you want to slam some other blog for being "closed"??? Ok, Mike. I'll wait for a while for some explanation, just in case it was some kind of accident.
But I'm not going to wait too long.
Just sayin'.
oc.
"anti-Bellevue virulence
naysayers
anti-Bellevue cadre
anti-Bellevue faithful
a joke
anti-Bellevue club
buckets of bile
a Bellevue contrarian/Bellevue contrarians
emotion-driven group
the Closed Forum
Integrity Does Count (But Only For Others)
Savaging Bellevue
contrarian groups
anti-Bellevue bile
bitter minority
clique ironically known as an Open Forum...
... the Forum is a place loaded with obscenities and filth.
anti-Bellevue sympathizers
playground mentality
anti-Bellevue opposition
toxic environment of the Formerly-Open Forum...
Mostly Closed Forum."
oc says:
Helping you out Mike... Back to your initial thread statement.
Is this one going to disappear too?
And those are just from you, yourself. Maybe you should have done some housekeeping in your own place before insisting that everyone else tidy up.
"Moonbat" and "sissy" look kinda minor now to me. Especially since you allowed someone to call another poster an "ass", and you still haven't taken care of that little bit of "house-keeping".
Just sayin'.
oc.
Watching,
I can tell you have been posting with an open Bible, but didn't satan temp Jesus with parts of scripture? It would be helpful though if you were to obey some of the words found there. A couple of references come to mind....
2 Tim 2:19 But God's firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: The Lord knows those who are his, and, Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity. 20 Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable. 21 Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work. 22 So flee youthful passions and pursue righteousness, faith, love, and peace, along with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart. 23 Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. 24 And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, 25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, 26 and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.
And
1 John 4.
As goes for "my little band of believers"...sounds just like something a spirit would mock a Christian with...wouldn't you say? How about the "Do you think God’s word originated with you Ezekial? Are you the only one to whom it was given?"..more mocking? Come to think of it, you make a practice of that, don't you. You have been mocking Dr. Rogers for some time, and many of your posts display the same tone...mocking....
And as long as we are discussing binding an plundering, the folowing seems particularly applicable to you.
33 Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad, for the tree is known by its fruit. 34 You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35 The good person out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. 36 I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, 37 for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.
I am sure you know where to find it. Why don't you run a poll and ask the audience if you have been speaking good...or evil. You don't seem to be able to tell the difference.
Calvinism...does "doctrine of man" mean anything to you? What about 2 Tim 2:23?
As to knowing me better than myself....maybe you do. The unclean spirit certainly knew who Jesus was. And the slave girl certainly knew Paul..
Acts 16:16 As we were going to the place of prayer, we were met by a slave girl who had a spirit of divination and brought her owners much gain by fortune-telling. 17 She followed Paul and us, crying out, These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation.
I guess we add the spirit of divination to the list...we are up to 8 now I think....
Can anyone say OBSESSIVE?
Watching,
"Ezekial, all who post here and at the "open forum" without exception are interested in the realization of the kingdom of God in our midst.
All who do not rejoice in this realization are against Christ."
Ok, then that would also include Dr. Rogers and the folks that have left BBC as well right?
So now we are back to everyone here are believers right?
If that is the case why do you engage in endless disputings and attacking Dr. Rogers all the time. What are you trying to teach? Calvinism? What difference does that make if we all look forward to the Kingdom of Heaven? And doesn't that prove the opposit of your point. Dr. Rogers was able to bring in the realization of the Kingdom for some...right?
"Yes, I am definitely mocking Dr. Roger's faulty theology and I guess that I am mocking your pharisaical pasting without explanation and generalization. "You seem to think that the more scripture you paste the holier you are. You seem to know neither the understanding of scripture nor the power of God."
Ah, that is the real problem though isn't it. The pasting I do is the WORD. No explanation needed because it does convict you doesn't it?
Do you really need this interpreted or explained?
23 Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. 24 And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, 25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, 26 and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.
Gifts? Not that road again, Charles. Most of us already know that visions, personal revelation and such have to come from scripture, the WORD, Jesus. I have already given you the scripture to show you that the Holy Spirit can only speak what Jesus gives Him. If you indeed have the Holy Spirit in you, you can only speak what the WORD gives you as well....
So if you really want to call yourself a prophet, I suggest your words should line up with his...and He doesn't talk about anything or talk anything like you do...now what does that tell us?
Watching,
"So your determination of me is by your interpretation of the Word"
No, actually my determination of you is based on your words. What you say and how you act. If you act and sound like spirits....that is the determination.
If you act like and sound like Christ..."be Christlike" then we would have to assume that you are of Christ...Did Christ ever relate a vision of a dead saint ever sitting anywhere but at his right hand? Did He ever relate a vision of any saint being judged in heaven?
"You are guessing that I am under the influence of evil spirits."
You, my friend, are pasting scripture for opinions."
I am not guessing Charles. I know. That is the only way to explain your actions and words. What is odd is that you condemn me for not interpeting in one post then tell me I interpret incorrectly in the next one.
"Your opinion is that. Your interpretation of scripture is a subjective personal and private interpretation. IYO (in your opinion)
You, my friend, are pasting scripture for opinions."
Isn't yours??? Don't you???
This has proved in the past to be endless argument with you Charles. It gets old for all of us. What it always has to come down to is the WORD of GOD. Not your opinion or mine.
With you though, we get visions...we get cursing and filth...all things you do while claiming special revelation
As far as I can tell, Charles, Jesus didn't come preaching filth, visions, cursing and such....He came preaching the Gospel.(Luke 20:1) You would do well to do the same...preach the Gospel. Avoid doctrines of men and your visions....
Dr. Rogers was able to bring in the realization of the Kingdom for some...right?
wrong!
Opinion? Interpretation?
Gotta go Charles...Good luck with those spirits. Jesus can deliver you.
A few things:
1) Some of us work on Saturdays. I deleted the tripe I found before I left for work yesterday, yet there's outrage (outrage, I tell you!) about posts made after I logged off. Talk about your selective pique...
2) If there's a donkey comparison left on this blog, someone please show it to me.
3) Page, your faux-theological posts are growing tiresome. You allege that God speaks to you in obscenities. He does not speak to anyone in such an unholy manner. Small children who are believers wouldn't presume to dirty the name of God, much less the name of Christian, the way you do. Either repent and get counseling, or get out.
4) OC, your little list falls under the "asked and answered" category. To save you the scrolling, though, I'll list some of my responses here, too:
"OC, I appreciate the encyclopedic nature of your response. You might notice that none of that is name-calling, or otherwise focused anywhere but on a group's activities or mindset. You know, an issue?"
"You're quite right. Which of those statements are untrue?
"I'll save you the trouble. Just from the few bits of anti-Bellevue detritus (there's another one for your collection) catalogued here, it's elementary to conclude that my observations were far more restrained than perhaps they should've been. Everything in your list is true, and you and your friends should, frankly, be ashamed of developing a place where hatred, lying, blackmail, and threats are the coins of the realm.
"When I asked them to cut that junk out, my requests weren't taken terribly well. Perhaps you could ask them yourself? Seriously, I gave up trying to keep up with the church-bashing awhile back, but I keep hearing they're still at it. I mean, there's violating the Biblical template for conflict resolution, and then there's running it through the shredder as they've been doing for awhile now..."
4) David the Cakes, I just came across your "tall" remark. Again, a remark from you that's beneath you; were I of a below-average height, would you insist I have a Napoleon complex?
5) Issues, folks. Issues.
--Mike
ezekiel said...
Dr. Rogers was able to bring in the realization of the Kingdom for some...right?
wrong!
Opinion? Interpretation?
Gotta go Charles...Good luck with those spirits. Jesus can deliver you.
2:16 PM, January 13, 2008
Charles's spirits are probably named Jack, Jim, and Jose
Mike,
It's a joke, brother--aimed at that persistant patriarchial tone. I'm not a trained psycotherapist nor play one on TV.
Watching,
I do thank you for your last post that actually quoted what I said rather than your paraphrasing and changing my words prior to that.
However, I don't believe your posts or my response are of any importance to the people on this blog or others.
My statement to you was in no way meant to mock your embarrassing experience with the pie.I was trying to tell you that your posts are not commnicating what you would like....they come over as being very immature and very self absorbed....and not stable.
I thought your intent was to share a message you believe came from God.
I won't try to help you again...I see it doesn't matter. I wish your family would help you, Charles.
Maybe EZ is correct. Maybe you are not just pitiful.
Between the schoolyard scraps, the name-calling, the pornographic language and descriptions, and the unrepentant rantings and theological posturings, there doesn't seem to be anything going on here that is of much substance in strengthening us in our walk, either individually or corporately. What could be a powerful tool for edifying the body of Christ has become a wasteland ... both deepening our schisms and delighting Satan.
Charles: You know NOTHING about the kind of trauma Gmomy, Christa, I and others have suffered. Nor do you UNDERSTAND that kind of trauma. If you truly did, you would not post as you do.
But then again I still love the sound of Mike's keyboard when he hits that delete key. I just would he would do it more often so that your offensive filth does not stay up as long as it does.
To many of us you are about as offensive that Pastor and his band of cohorts that protest at the funerals of our fallen soldiers. They too claim to be doing God's work. It has yet to be determined what god they are serving.
Once again I am calling on you to repent and turn to Jesus Christ and Him alone.
David Brown
Do I hear Mike's keys going delete, delete again?
Charles you try to taunt and elicit arguments. You love strife. But it doesn’t work.
No one really cares what you think or feel, so get used to it. You are a non factor as many of us are concerned.
Call me all the names you want, make all the judgments about my actions and emotions. Make all the ASSumptions you want. Still no one cares, especially me.
But please in the name of Christ, repent! Before it is too late!
Delete, delete, delete, delete.
David Brown
WHS,
I think that would be your call, bro.
Post a Comment