A Relevant Holiness Message

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I guess it just seems strange and uncomfortable, to me, to post something from someone's Facebook or church website and talk about it on-line.

••But the things you're talking about here are out there in the public. These people are broadcasting it and when one does that, there will be opinions and it will get discussed. What I DON'T like is when someone will post on AFF something against their pastor, a sermon they didn't like, a look he gave, a decision he made. That stuff reeks.

Like they embezzled money or something.

••This is way different than that. If someone embezzles money, their revival calendar dries up instantly. That person would be in great need of forgiveness, restoration, love, and help. In this case, we have a pastor who openly and regularly bashes others and an evangelist who mocked and made fun of other servants of the Lord. Both are highly esteemed by many because of their schticks and it's totally fair for us to talk about that.

LOL! It's one of those things that you know is going to come back and bite you somewhere down the road.

••I am routinely trashed for things we do in our church services so I got used to that a long time ago. I have a file of anonymous letters and emails calling me all kinds of names....so oh well.

We pretty much had a character assassination, publicly, of RM and GP here.

••No we didn't. Nothing about this is character assassination. These sermons were posted on the WORLD WIDE web and feedback was generated. I've heard nothing about their character. Their character is completely beside the point, really. GP may have the top-rated character in all of America, but he still mocked, made fun of, and laughed at a fellow servant of the Lord...one who recently passed away, no less. Same for RM. He loudly condemned others and then approved someone who did what he condemned. Those two things deserve discussion.

If we can't do that here, we should just post pictures of our grandkids, pictures of the snow, and trade recipes, in which case, AFF will have 3 people log on each day.

Anyone lurking who doesn't know them, will be given a certain impression that is not the whole of their lives or character. I think that is a shame.

••Decent point, but I'm not sure about that. And...I'm not sure it matters, really. As well, do you object when Nancy Pelosi is trashed like she is on AFF, when Obama is trashed like he is on AFF? Certainly, those opinions will give a certain impression that is not "the whole of their lives or character."

I'm not against discussing things that have been made a matter of public record in the news, etc. Bringing something up and making it the news myself? "Did you see or read this? Let me point out this flaw or inconsistency to you."

••But that's exactly what is happening here. When this stuff is posted on the WORLD WIDE web, it's news and it's a matter of the public record. Look, if Benny Hinn had a sermon posted on the internet in which he used the f-bomb 22 times, don't you think that would be news? Don't you think we would be talking about it here? You know we would and I don't think there's any chance whatsoever you would come to his defense. And in my little opinion, what was done here was worse than a slang term for sexual intercourse.

And like my husband said, "Some things I don't agree with, but I'm not going to talk about GP or anyone else."

••Good for him. Really. The world needs more people like that and I respect him for that. But if every single person in the world were like that, a lot of things in this world would go unchecked and that wouldn't be good.

Couldn't agree more. I'm just glad he is that way. He would never become a part of this forum and participate like that. It's not his way. And I am very sure that he would agree with MP's post. He just wouldn't voice it publicly. We talk privately about things, but we don't share things publicly.

••The only real difference of you two discussing things between the two of you, and talking about it here on the forum, is the size of the audience.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by notofworks

••••But the things you're talking about here are out there in the public.

I'm glad you brought this up and I am not going to have the time this evening that I did yesterday for back to back response. Just letting you know.

What you posted above is what bothers me, because you HAVE to go to his website and drag it over here for the discussion. Someone went there, DA (?) or someone related it to DA and he is like - COOL BEANS - another inconsistency in the ranks!!! Let's roll some heads around on my AI Forum (the one I wanted to use to attack the UPCI - hence AI ) AND AFF because this is fodder that goes over well with the members. Just sayin'...

You can't actually see the scenario here?

Now, what did I do with that buzzard image?

I try not to post on this type of thread, but sometimes I just do. Toe Torry.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I'm glad you brought this up and I am not going to have the time this evening that I did yesterday for back to back response. Just letting you know.

What you posted above is what bothers me, because you HAVE to go to his website and drag it over here for the discussion. Someone went there, DA (?) or someone related it to DA and he is like - COOL BEANS - another inconsistency in the ranks!!! Let's roll some heads around on my AI Forum (the one I wanted to use to attack the UPCI - hence AI ) AND AFF because this is fodder that goes over well with the members. Just sayin'...

You can't actually see the scenario here?

Now, what did I do with that buzzard image?

I try not to post on this type of thread, but sometimes I just do. Toe Torry.

So if Jimmy Swaggart posts a sermon on his church website in which he calls Billy Graham a stupid idiot who doesn't know the difference between John 3:16 and a Hardy Boys book, you're saying you'd come on here when it was discussed and say, "That's not news, you all shouldn't be talking about him like that"?

[Praxeas]

There is an Evangelist here on SoCal that reminds me of Poe. He does a LOT of superfluous talking, trying to be funny and even referencing worldly songs like Peter Frampton's "Do you feel like I do".

At one point when our sound guy did not give him enough monitor he requested before the service he asked him "Hey sound guy? Speak english?"..our sound guy that night was a 15 year old young hispanic man...I wanted to slap some sense into that guy. It just does not impress me and certainly there is no spiritual value in that kind of stuff..did he even crack a bible open?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by notofworks

So if Jimmy Swaggart posts a sermon on his church website in which he calls Billy Graham a stupid idiot who doesn't know the difference between John 3:16 and a Hardy Boys book, you're saying you'd come on here when it was discussed and say, "That's not news, you all shouldn't be talking about him like that"?

If I read that on the Drudge Report or in the WSJ, I might become involved in that. The news will be scrolling as a headline. That makes it more public, but that is just how I view it. Howevah, I wouldn't "monitor" his website or Facebook page - like a buzzard. Just saying'....

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

If I read that on the Drudge Report or in the WSJ, I might become involved in that. The news will be scrolling as a headline. That makes it more public, but that is just how I view it. Howevah, I wouldn't "monitor" his website or Facebook page - like a buzzard. Just saying'....

You peruse decorating magazines - DA peruses sermons - to each his own!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

You peruse decorating magazine - DA peruses sermons - to each his own!

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

If I read that on the Drudge Report or in the WSJ, I might become involved in that. The news will be scrolling as a headline. That makes it more public, but that is just how I view it. Howevah, I wouldn't "monitor" his website or Facebook page - like a buzzard. Just saying'....

But somebody DID watch it and give out the information. It doesn't matter WHO did, someone did. And it becomes news. It seems what you're saying here that things are only news if Drudge of that other thing you mentioned, or something like, reveals it. That doesn't make any sense to me.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by notofworks

But somebody DID watch it and give out the information. It doesn't matter WHO did, someone did. And it becomes news. It seems what you're saying here that things are only news if Drudge of that other thing you mentioned, or something like, reveals it. That doesn't make any sense to me.

Goodness, NOW! Drudge is a news source. That is what they do. Christians are not, at least I thought, supposed to act like a news source zeroing in on all faults, inconsistencies and failures while picking each other apart like a vulture!

[Pressing-On]

Originally posted by Pressing-On; And like my husband said, "Some things I don't agree with, but I'm not going to talk about GP or anyone else."

Originally Posted by notofworks

••Good for him. Really. The world needs more people like that and I respect him for that. But if every single person in the world were like that, a lot of things in this world would go unchecked and that wouldn't be good.

••The only real difference of you two discussing things between the two of you, and talking about it here on the forum, is the size of the audience.

I didn't have time to address this, but I want to make a final point.

Sure our audience of two is smaller, but not everything is everyone's business nor do you need to drag a large audience in to take care of all issues, especially concerning church matters.

I think you need to carefully choose your audience. 4,000 people viewing who, more than likely, would not have become involved are now involved. Was that the point of the thread?