I had a crack at answering this a few days ago, but I lost it, and I hate
redoing things, but at the same time I don't like leaving things unanswered
knowingly.
So let's hope I don't lose it this time...
news:boap3o$1bnqq3$1@ID-140581.news.uni-berlin.de...
> "Uncle Davey" wrote:
> > "t_naismith" wrote:
> > > "Jason Gastritis" burped up this mess:
<snippage of the old stuff>
> > Your style is quite amusing, I have to admit, even though you're
attacking
> > my friend.
> >
> > Sure we want to evangelise you. There has been no attempt to hide the
fact
> > that we like to spread the Gospel.
> >
> Actually, your buddies Jason and Ariaane went to some
> superficial lengths to deny that they were here in a.r.w. to
> _evangelize_. So, who is lying, you or they?
I'm not sure I agree with you. I doubt they would have denied evangelising
when we are commanded to evangelise.
>
> > We nevertheless like to do it in a reasoned way, dealing with and
reacting
> > to the points of faith in other people's world views.
> >
> By and large, few if any here would wish to here your
> evangelizing, no matter what form it takes.
>
I can well imagine that. "The carnal mind is enmity against God. It is not
subject to the laws of God, nor indeed can it be" But if we only took the
message to people who have already lost their carnal minds and gained new
minds and had their stoney heart taken out and given a new heart, then what
sort of evangelists would we be???
> > By propounding your views as we propounded ours, you had all the chance
to
> > make converts of us, humanly speaking, as we had to make converts of
you.
> >
> Ah, therein lies a difference in parsdigms, Davey. Most pagans do
> not wish to make "converts" of you lot and mainly would do as they've
> done; request that you cease and desist. These requests have ranged
> from polite to more, shall we say, direct? All have been disregared by
> you and your fellow missionaries.
>
Not true. Ariaan has bid you farewell, Jason seems to be disengaging.
> > I say 'humanly speaking', because all true conversion is only done by
God
> > anyway, and we only plant seeds, we don't make them germinate.
> >
> Then wheel your "g-d" in here and let 'im try, why does 'he' need
> willing missionaries to do 'his' dirty work?
Actually, He doesn't. But we are priveledged to be offered a small role in
God's calling in His kingdom.
> > Nevertheless, it has disturbed some of my brethren, (not myself I have
to
> > say, as I am so wicked by nature I am past being shocked by anything),
> that
> > there has been a stream of blasphemy and crudity from some participants,
> and
> > this wasn't what they had in mind when they came here.
> >
> The responses have been precisely-gaged to suit specific
> instances.
>
> > You are saying you didn't want to be evangelised, and at the same time
you
> > are calling Jason chicken for announcing a retirement from the debate, a
> > sure fire way of making someone go the distance.
> >
> No, you fail to comprehend what was stated, Davey.
> Jason was berated for starting a cross-posted incursion
> into a.r.w. and then a 'brave exit speech' which equates
> to buggering-off after he didn't like the response to this.
> At no point in the past has he indicated that he is able to
> participate in a "debate", (which is not demonstrated by
> his various announced claims but, by participating in them).
>
Nevertheless, he is a very fine debater. If you disregard for one moment
your distaste for his credo, look at the website and assess the high quality
of some of the debating in their. there are even publicised phone debates he
has had.
> > So I have a couple of questions for you:
> >
> > 1. Do you want us to stay or go? (Because you gave a mixed message
above)
> >
> Stay if wished. Do not attempt to dictate posting parameters
> to an unmoderated NG to which you lot are cross-posting _To_.
> Additionally, whining about the nature of the replies received to
> various nonsense you post merely makes you look petulant.
>
Well, I haven't done it. Between you and me I'm not a great big fan of
netiquette, actually.
> > 2. Are you aware of what the message is that we are preaching?
>
> Yes, and there is no need for its repetition - by either you or I.
Hmmmmmn.
>
> > Could you put
> > the Christian gospel in your own words for me, so that I can see whether
> you
> > are rejecting what we are actually trying to say or only what you think
we
> > are trying to say.
> >
> As I iterate above, there is no need. Your "message" is
> summarily rejected by this poster. Is that clear enough, Davey?
It's clear that when I asked you to summarise what our message was, you
didn't do it.
There's still a risk in my mind that you don't know what you're rejecting.
>
> > 3. Is your first name Timothy and do you come from the UK?
> >
> No, the first name is Trevor and I come from another land.
> Are you actually posting from Warsaw, Davey?
I am, Trevor.
Right from the heart of Warsaw.
Uncle Davey, with a good Polish beer in hand.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 |
|