[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

Just a few points to put the ball back in your court here.

* I didn't see where anybody questioned me about a gay shacking up situation... and, thus, didn't reply to it.

Your post was questioned here and here - and questioned rather gently, I think, given the inflamatory nature of your accusations.

Originally Posted by Steadfast

* You seem to think that I smeared the UPC... how? I have NEVER, in all my years of forum posting, taken a shot at the UPC for anything.

You said:

Friends... I can attest to the fact that some issues are almost pushing some of these brethren into these actions. Let me tell you how I see it from my perspective.

"These brethren" are the men forming a new org. and leaving the UPC. You opened your post with this statement, thus setting the context for the "issues" that you go on to describe. That context is the UPC and "issues" that are "almost pushing" men out.

This is the context that you created for your post. It is a context very narrowly aimed at the United Pentecostal Church.

Originally Posted by Steadfast

* Think skinned? No, just somewhat offended that you would come on a forum and say, "That stuff Steadfast said happened? DIDN'T HAPPEN!" That, by implication, is saying that I lied.

Well, here is progress. We've gone from me "calling you a liar" to an implication. But what about other motives that you may have had in saying what you did. It is most likely that deceit never entered your heart. However, when you saw (the "Tulsa 6") having their motives questioned you sought for some sort of defense for these men. That defense was the accusations you made in your post which was aimed directly at the UPC.

Originally Posted by Steadfast

You seem a little 'thin skinned' that I didn't look up your profile to address you (there are some incredibly brilliant women who post on here, by the way) but you seem to imply your a man.

"Hey, folks... Pelathais implies he's a man. HE'S NOT!!! Total fabrication! Didn't happen!" Yep, just what I thought. You would think I called you a liar, too.

Your confusion reigns here.

Originally Posted by Steadfast

But, as you say, I'll accept that 'no blood; no foul' defense. However, I would like for you to find that ONE single, solitary instance when I EVER 'smeared' the UPC... on AFF, NFCF, WS or CAF. That search should take you quite a while so I'll go on and finish life while I wait.

I said "No harm; no foul." If we were contesting to the blood then I would be truly concerned. And, I said that in your defense. And the "one solitary instance" is posted above. I did not need to search for it because it is what we've been talking about all along.

You sought to justify the actions of the WPF men by bringing up the "shacking up without backsliding" anecdote and social drinking. You brought these "issues" up in the context of men being "almost pushed" out of the UPC.

When called on it, you responded by clarifying that it was a heterosexual "shacking up" with the "young men" (but the 'men' remains plural thus giving the inference of homosexual activity). You also now appear to say that this was not a discussion of the UPC?

The ball is back in your court.