| Poster | Thread |
| | Re: Dismissal from SI | | Mike, I appreciate a response from you.
crsschk said
Quote:
Dorcas, you are as wrong as could be. You are making a lot of assumptions and turning this whole thing into one giant psychobabble.
Mike, believe me, I don't enter into this discussion with a lightness of heart. As I indicated in my last post, I have [i]never[/i] felt so disheartened on behalf of SI, by the assumptions [b]you[/b] have made in this case.
It is not as if you don't know Karl of longstanding - of his understanding of scripture and his spiritual gift of exposing the panorama of underlying truths. You [i]know[/i] he is a true brother in the Lord, and yet you have not treated him as one whom you hoped to win - not even posted a question to him privately; you felt so sure of your ground you deleted his post before even [i]contacting[/i] him?
Diane has written of the 'SI community', and many times we are falling over ourselves with each other to draw out the strands of a doctrine which will not make any difference to our salvation if we know the Lord already. Karl tried to draw out the [u]truth[/u] in the 'Jesus as lover' construct, and you did[u]n't[/u] 'see' it. You didn't [i]hear[/i] him. And you ab-reacted more strongly than I've ever seen.
As an observer of this moment in SI history, I [i]am[/i] in a positon to ask for some account, since you have [i]not[/i] followed the constraints you seek to place on everyone else in light of the many previous occasions of possible misunderstandings.
Please note, if Karl had been defending the concept as it was presented in Andrew Strom's article which headed the other 'Jesus as LOVER' thread, I would [u]not[/u] be contending this way.
I hope you know me better than this - that I, as much as you, (and Karl, and everyone else), am keen for the value of [u]scripture[/u] to be embraced by our [i]spiritual[/i] understanding.
(Young) 2 Timothy 3:15, 16
... the Holy Writings thou hast known, which are able to make thee [b][u]wise[/u]--to salvation[/b], through faith [b]that [is] in Christ Jesus[/b];
every Writing [is] God-breathed, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, [b]for setting aright[/b], for instruction [b]that [is] in righteousness[/b],
Quote:
How difficult is it to see that a continuation by way of over explanation is only serving to drive an issue that needs to die first before it can even be thought to have a corrective.
By my response so far, you see that I disagree. Being completely candid, the thing 'that needs to die' is your misapprehension of what Karl wrote.
Are you forgetting that I did [u]read[/u] Karl's post?
(And my post, (which you did not delete), tried to draw out the [u]distinction[/u] between his words and the matter under discussion in the first 'Jesus as LOVER' thread.)
This leads to another question:
[b]Do you still have access to Karl's original text?[/b]
If so, you will be able to note that he did [u]not[/u] use a certain word which both you and Greg have "quoted" him as using.
Of course, if you can't access his words any more, you won't be able to reconsider the validity of his meaning. But, I see the failure to restore his credibility on the point of how you've quoted him, as a very serious matter....... The more so, because what he actually said did not even [i][b]imply[/i] [/b]what you have represented it to.
As a text-based ministry, it should not be [i][b]possible[/i][/b] to misquote someone [i][b]ever[/i][/b]. But if it has been possible completely to lose access to his words - which at least you could have quoted accurately to him in private - this technical matter should be rectified asap for the sake of us all. I'm sure it could be, for it is unacceptable to misrepresent anyone like this - even if you continue to feel justified in your assumptions about a poster's meaning.
As I believe, I [i]did[/i] understand his post, and [i]know[/i] it was not saying what you are putting forth, I [i]will[/i] stand on the side of righteousness [i]on behalf of [u]your own[/u], as much as of his.[/i]
Quote:
It applies foremost to the galling thing, this Jesus as 'lover' blaspheme
Earlier in the original thread, p2, Diane quoted Charles Wesley's hymn, 'Jesus, lover of my soul, let me to Thy bosom fly' and did not receive any comment about it. [b]Why not?[/b] I will patiently wait for your answer.
[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=12282&forum=35&start=10&viewmode=flat&order=0]https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=12282&forum=35&start=10&viewmode=flat&order=0[/url]
Quote:
When will you stop explaining what every one is thinking or saying?
Well, you are thinking and saying things which are from your own mind, and you are attributing them to Karl.
I comment because there is valid observation to be made.
I would like to see you take ownership of your concerns and [u]divide between[/u] what you [i]think[/i] Karl said and what he [i]did[/i] say.
Quote:
[i]for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.[/i]
Mike, there is a world of difference between the relevance of this verse in scripture [i]in context[/i] and what is happening here, in this thread.
Please note, I am not attempting to restate Karl's thought. I am driving at the issues which have arisen from your dealings with it: in the first instance, the need for [u]honesty[/u] regarding the misquote of the [u]content[/u] of his post.
Whereas Karl may be [i]willing[/i] to leave with his reputation in tatters because of how you've misrepresented him, I am not willing to let this pass. What may have passed between you guys in private, I have no idea and (obviously, I hope) cannot comment, but, on what I [u]have[/u] seen and [u]know[/u], I can and do. This is [i]not[/i] a matter of not savouring the things of God. This is about a standard of righteousness which can be seen and commended by all.
|
|  2006/9/14 5:58 | | Spitfire
Member
Joined: 2004/8/3
Posts: 633
| | Re: the tragedy of peace at any cost | | Diane, I liked what you had to say here.
Quote:
While harmonious fellowship is a blessing that we crave, God has much more in mind. He is moving us forward, but we tend not to understand it, or see the need. It typically gets rocky because we resist, not because the devil is playing games with us.
Quote:
If we fail to value the fire, then the tragedy would not be a lost member as much as the lessons that never got learned.
I've decided I'd rather get in fellowship somewhere and scratch each other's eyes out, than make nice and never scratch the surface of the sacred cows in my own heart. Dian |
| | 2006/9/14 6:03 | Profile | philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | dorcas' Quote:
Whereas Karl may be willing to leave with his reputation in tatters because of how you've misrepresented him, I am not willing to let this pass. What may have passed between you guys in private, I have no idea and (obviously, I hope) cannot comment, but, on what I have seen and know, I can and do. This is not a matter of not savouring the things of God. This is about a standard of righteousness which can be seen and commended by all.
Elders sometimes makes mistakes. Sometimes they make very public mistakes. But elders also have unique gifts given to enable them to fulfill their role. They sometimes have information that they cannot share and sometimes discernment that they cannot share either. Sometimes they have a spiritual 'gut reaction' which they cannot explain fully which tells them when a line has been crossed that must be addressed.
We will all have to give an account of our own words on SI but our moderators will have to give an account to God for what they permitted on the whole site. This is a very onerous responsibility and one which should attract our prayer. Eldership can only work in an atmosphere of mutual trust. When this breaks down decisions have to be made. In a church setting a man or woman who cannot trust the spirit of the oversight has to find the grace to do so or move on. The same is true of this website.
"I am not willing to let this pass" is not a suitable response to those to whom God has trusted us. It is the spirit of protest and rebellion. That does not mean that an aggrieved person cannot address the oversight but such a person can never address the oversight publicly with that spirit. It is the shrill response of one who will be heard whatever the consequences.
This particular thread began with the words...I started this thread probably due to the fact that I will probably be dismissed.
But mainly to for the purpose of how far can we go on SI before being dismissed.
Family members, your input is greatly appreciated. That ought to have warned us that this thread could only be divisive and the earliest replies were unanimous in their counsel 'let it go'. When we set up a situation in which the saints are effectively invited to take sides in which one will be "puffed up for one against another" we ought not to be surprised when it happens.
Margaret Thatcher once denied terrorists 'the oxygen of publicity'. It has merit as course of action. Personally, I would recommend that the thread is locked and that any further conversations take place where they ought to have taken place... in private emails.
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
| | 2006/9/14 6:50 | Profile | Spitfire
Member
Joined: 2004/8/3
Posts: 633
| | Re: | | Quote:
Personally, I would recommend that the thread is locked and that any further conversations take place where they ought to have taken place... in private emails.
I soooo totally agree. Dian. |
| | 2006/9/14 7:44 | Profile |
| | Re: | | I wish this thread would just die... it's a real source of dissention.
Krispy |
| | 2006/9/14 9:48 | | mamaluk
Member
Joined: 2006/6/12
Posts: 524
| | Re: Elijah | | Dear KrispyK
You are too funny!!
I stayed away for awhile, and just now realized that I was "insulted" as if I thought I were Elijah. Hahah, I like that, seeing my name next to Elijah's!! No, no insults at all, no one can ever insult me because in the flesh, I'm NOTHING, in spirit, I'm in CHRIST, only not to insult GOD.
Praise God!
What does it matter what you call me, say to me, insult me, disrespect me, mock me, hate me, love me. NONE matters, but may I insist, if not with Scriptures, with my own silly words, please do hold on tight to the glory of GOD's and HIS holy name, no matter what.
[b]To love HIM, is to obey HIM by honoring and reverencing HIM THE WAY HE COMMANDS!!![/b]
Let's glorify God in our heavenly church with this traditional doxology:
"Praise God from whom all blessings flow,
Praise Him all creatures here below,
Praise Him above ye heavenly host,
Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost...Amen! "
the false Elijah, indeed I am, Praise God, I'm nothing, HE is ALL !
mamaluk, :) :)
|
| | 2006/9/14 12:43 | Profile | sermonindex
Moderator
Joined: 2002/12/11
Posts: 39795
Canada
Online! | | Re: | | Quote:
We will all have to give an account of our own words on SI but our moderators will have to give an account to God for what they permitted on the whole site. This is a very onerous responsibility and one which should attract our prayer. Eldership can only work in an atmosphere of mutual trust. When this breaks down decisions have to be made. In a church setting a man or woman who cannot trust the spirit of the oversight has to find the grace to do so or move on. The same is true of this website.
I would ask that the members in this thread that have been name-calling and causing disension would not continue this at all. If this type of behavior drifts over to other threads there will be warnings sent out to those members.
I have had many requests to close and lock this forum, and by reviewing some of the posts I cannot but agree. Thank you Ron for your balanced educational post in the midst of this confusion.
May all the people at SI please read this thread and listen to the sermon on it:
[b]SI ANNOUNCEMENT: gracious speech[/b]
https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=12316&forum=16&2
This thread is [b]locked[/b].
_________________
SI Moderator - Greg Gordon
|
| | 2006/9/14 12:48 | Profile |
|
