A Relevant Holiness Message

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Thanks for the sarcasm, ladies. This reminds me of why I stopped posting here in the first place.

.

Any time, Mike.

[Michael Phelps]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Any time, Mike.

Ok, let me qualify my statement. I hit send too soon, because someone came into my office.

I don't have a gripe with you and Mizpeh, personally, PO, just the dialogue style here.

I get frustrated when we (and and all of us on AFF) are discussing a subject, and one person can't come back with a legitimate response concerning the subject, so they revert to cliche, sarcasm, or all out insult.

This just happened to me on another thread a couple of days ago, and that's why I said this reminds me of why I stopped posting in the first place.

Let's dissect this:

SUBJECT - RM preached against using worldly songs, GP got up and used one a week later in his pulpit.

Points of View - Some think RM is a hypocrite, some think GP's message was crude and uncalled for

That's what I want to discuss....and I've made it very clear that I don't have a beef with RM on this issue, although NOW made a good point about the message being posted on the public WWW.

I've been VERY clear that my issue is with GP's style of delivery (it's not an opinin, by the way) and the content of his words.

However, you seem to be focused on the fact that the REAL issue is that Daniel posted it on this website and you don't particularly care for Daniel, so he shouldn't pick on GP and RM, and be buzzard like.

I maintain that WHERE it came from is irrelevant, if it was said, it was said, and is open for discussion.

Your latest response to me was that my analogy was weak, and Mizpeh sarcastically said "It was done in love"......

THAT is my problem with this type of format......it's too easy to leave things unresolved, and to resort to drive by comments.

I didn't stop posting because of you and Miz.......but, because of the futility of trying to have an intelligent conversation when it's too easy for people to stop interacting logically any time they run out of good pushback.

Hopefully, that helped clear it up!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Michael Phelps

Ok, let me qualify my statement. I hit send too soon, because someone came into my office.

I don't have a gripe with you and Mizpeh, personally, PO, just the dialogue style here.

I get frustrated when we (and and all of us on AFF) are discussing a subject, and one person can't come back with a legitimate response concerning the subject, so they revert to cliche, sarcasm, or all out insult.

This just happened to me on another thread a couple of days ago, and that's why I said this reminds me of why I stopped posting in the first place.

Let's dissect this:

SUBJECT - RM preached against using worldly songs, GP got up and used one a week later in his pulpit.

Points of View - Some think RM is a hypocrite, some think GP's message was crude and uncalled for

That's what I want to discuss....and I've made it very clear that I don't have a beef with RM on this issue, although NOW made a good point about the message being posted on the public WWW.

I've been VERY clear that my issue is with GP's style of delivery (it's not an opinin, by the way) and the content of his words.

However, you seem to be focused on the fact that the REAL issue is that Daniel posted it on this website and you don't particularly care for Daniel, so he shouldn't pick on GP and RM, and be buzzard like.

I maintain that WHERE it came from is irrelevant, if it was said, it was said, and is open for discussion.

Your latest response to me was that my analogy was weak, and Mizpeh sarcastically said "It was done in love"......

THAT is my problem with this type of format......it's too easy to leave things unresolved, and to resort to drive by comments.

I didn't stop posting because of you and Miz.......but, because of the futility of trying to have an intelligent conversation when it's too easy for people to stop interacting logically any time they run out of good pushback.

Hopefully, that helped clear it up!

No, Michael, let's start with DA cropping the messages and posting them on YouTube for "public" critique and then dragging it here and his forum - AI. This sermon wasn't a "public" matter until Daniel decided to do the witch hunt. That is what my beef is about. All the other analysis is a moot point.

And back to the posting, just from experience, we usually work it out after the misunderstandings, no matter how many. So all of the push back, good or bad, is no big deal.