Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Zsarnok <zsar@nok.earth.link.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.fan.uncle-davey
Subject: Re: I Rescind My Offer
References: <QM1qb.26099$CZ5.12382@twister.socal.rr.com> <boae1j$1c7a4d$1@ID-140581.news.uni-berlin.de> <boano2$qq9$2@nemesis.news.tpi.pl> <boap3o$1bnqq3$1@ID-140581.news.uni-berlin.de> <bojgkn$qqd$1@nemesis.news.tpi.pl> <Mcyrb.18643$Oo4.17634@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net> <bomlgq$11$1@news.onet.pl>
In-Reply-To: <bomlgq$11$1@news.onet.pl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 344
Message-ID: <MuBrb.19053$Oo4.13701@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 01:04:44 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.135.139.145
X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net
X-Trace: newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net 1068426284 65.135.139.145 (Sun, 09 Nov 2003 17:04:44 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 17:04:44 PST
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.uncle-davey:370
Piorokrat wrote:
> Uzytkownik "Zsarnok" <zsar@nok.earth.link.net> napisal w wiadomosci
> news:Mcyrb.18643$Oo4.17634@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>>Uncle Davey wrote:
>
>
> <snip>
>
>>>I'm not sure I agree with you. I doubt they would have denied
>
> evangelising
>
>>>when we are commanded to evangelise.
>>>
>>
>>The commands you follow do not override other people's rights. Once
>>your offer is rejected the courteous thing would be to leave. Again.
>
>
> Sure you've got a right not to agree with me.
>
> I'll even agree you've got a right to sling me out, if you take a vote and
> the majority say I should leave, then I'll leave.
> I'm a big fan of democracy.
>
Davey?
>
>>>>>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???
>>>
>>
>>Saving people when they don't want it may be following your God's law.
>>It is however soliciting against peoples wishes and against the law.
>>It's also rude.
>
>
> I know. I do try to be the David Niven type courteous English gentleman, but
> when I see people hurtling into the pit it seems a bit tough not to put my
> hand out just because we haven't been properly introduced.
>
In this case you were introduced.
>
>>>>>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.
>>>
>>
>>Well he said he was leaving and is still posting here. So did you. Is
>>it ok with your God to lie to us because we have "carnal mind(s)"?
>>Since we don't follow your God we are less than human, eh?
>
>
> I never said I was leaving. My first indication of leaving has been my offer
> to leave if voted off by a majority.
> In this very handicrafted poste.
> Please show me where I said I was leaving before that.
>
I was responding to Davey. But I checked and I was wrong, Ariaan said
goodbye. My mistake, sorry.
>
>>>>>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.
>>>
>>
>>Then please, stay within his kingdom and only travel amoung those who
>>welcome you.
>
>
> That's called 'preaching to the converted' and is the religious equivalent
> of tilting at windmills.
>
Tilting at windmills is an impossible or useless task, not a redundant
one. There are those yet not converted who would welcome you. Look harder.
>
>>>>>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.
>>>
>>
>>We've had personal contact. Prepared and carefully chosen presentations
>>may look good, but in direct contact he's not that impressive.
>
>
> I'll be my own judge of that, since I hope to meet him.
> I won't say on usenet anyway whatever I find out by meeting him, as I
> consider that the number one unethical thing you can do on Usenet.
> This is the whole background to why I left soc.singles last January and my
> group got set up for me by those who wanted to keep reading my stuff.
> In that group, betrayal of hospitality is seen as a cardinal virtue by the
> ruling militia.
>
Enjoy the visit. Life's tough sometimes.
>
>>>>>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.
>>>
>>
>>The overly formalized little hangups of people who got here first can be
>>irritating. Courtesy, however, is not picky or tacky or that hard to
>
> show.
>
> All I can repeat is that netiquette is not my obsession. I think there are
> important ethical concerns where usenet borders on real life, but other than
> that I have to say that this is primarily an entertainment medium.
>
Some are here to exchange ideas and socialize as well.
>
>>>
>>>>>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.
>>>
>>
>>You offered, we rejected. You can stay and play. If you feel too
>>strongly about it to contain yourself, then find a more receptive
>
> audience.
>
> Well, unless voted off by a majority, I will stay in all likelihood.
>
Lovely condition to put before an unmoderated group. Like saying you'll
pay taxes when the IRS switches to Greek currency.
>
>>>>>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.
>
>>Perfect understanding is not required for a thoughtful rejection.
>>That's assuming of course that your offer is all that complicated, which
>>to me it isn't. It's just awful is all.
>
>
> That's up to you.
That's it! That's what I've been saying! See, you can get it.
Congratulations.
> No one can force you into accepting Christ as your personal saviour.
>
True.
>
>>>>>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.
>>>
>>
>>Can't you save the Catholics, Davey? There's already common ground.
>>
>
>
> I can't save anybody, but we did have three newcomers who were catholics in
> Church today.
>
Good for you.
>
>
> I looked up your name in a Hungarian dictionary but I couldn't find it as a
> word.
>
> I am curious as to the origin. It sounds like either the Slavic root for
> 'grain' or the root for 'heat', but the spelling is rather Hungarian, than
> Slavic...
>
> Best,
>
> Uncle Davey
>
Yes it is Hungarian. BTW, 4 languages is impressive.
The info came up as a full page and doesn't cut and paste to text.
Besides, I thought you'd be amused:
http://dict.sztaki.hu/dict_search.php?L=HUN%3AENG%3AEngHunDict&O=ENG&flash=&E=1&sid=6629c0b590d070027bc6f32718e0ccfc&in_form=1&W=zsarnok&M=2&P=0&C=1&A=0&T=1&F=0
You know what to do if the browser cut the link, I'm sure.
What can I say? I was called this by someone I had mildly perturbed.
Zsarnok (Wear it proudly and with a grin.)
|
| 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 |
|