Tragedy of War RECOVERED! LISTEN!

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by bishoph

That may be a principal of law.....but it is a flawed principle. If anyone is willing to believe that KH/OH or anyone for that matter, would have stood up and objected to what was being said in the middle of a sermon being preached with a conference crowd present, I have some ocean front property in Montana for sale. (Besides that we all know of situations where people have NOT spoken up or come forward and their refusal to do so did not mean that the event did/did not happen.)

It really doesn't matter in the bigger scheme of things.....as I said earlier, the movement was developing and anyone who would deny that is willfully ignorant. Regardless of whether she (OH) was in church at the time or not, at some point the movement as a whole...black/white, UPC/PAW/ALJC/COOLJ....Nearly all oneness organizations, developed a more restrictive doctrine of separation/sanctification from the world and a water/spirit view of salvation.

Your being ridiculous. The point wasn't that they should stand up in the conference, no one would expect that. The point is they never objected after the Sermon. Both have passed from this life never having protested his assertion. Unheard of if in fact it were untrue.

The only thing flawed is your own inability to accept anything outside of your narrow view as true.

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

Your being ridiculous. The point wasn't that they should stand up in the conference, no one would expect that. The point is they never objected after the Sermon. Both have passed from this life never having protested his assertion. Unheard of if in fact it were untrue.

The only thing flawed is your own inability to accept anything outside of your narrow view as true.

You can't make either assumption, you couldn't possibly know if either of them ever objected or disagreed with the assertion made unless you personally asked them or were privy to their conversation on the subject, and you don't know me at all, so you don't know what I accept or don't.

Using your logic, the fact that Bro. Yaden was fired and his career finished (the OP's statement in post 1) could be evidence that they did not agree with his statements. To say that KH coward down to political pressure would indicate that he was a man who would not stand for the principles he believed.....a charge I think unworthy of such a great man.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by bishoph

You can't make either assumption, you couldn't possibly know if either of them ever objected or disagreed with the assertion made unless you personally asked them or were privy to their conversation on the subject, and you don't know me at all, so you don't know what I accept or don't.

Using your logic, the fact that Bro. Yaden was fired and his career finished (the OP's statement in post 1) could be evidence that they did not agree with his statements. To say that KH coward down to political pressure would indicate that he was a man who would not stand for the principles he believed.....a charge I think unworthy of such a great man.

The same great man who walked up to LY after the sermon and told him it was one of the best he had heard in 40 years? The one that promised to protect him when reports began to circulate that some where offended? The one who sent someone else to ask for his resignation? Is that the great man you speak of?

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Baron1710

The same great man who walked up to LY after the sermon and told him it was one of the best he had heard in 40 years? The one that promised to protect him when reports began to circulate that some where offended? The one who sent someone else to ask for his resignation? Is that the great man you speak of?

So now, you would try to impugn the man you previously used to support your view. Further, you speak of these things as though you were personally there......if that is the case then you certainly can say what you saw/heard.....otherwise (unless you have been told it by one or more of those directly involved) it is hearsay, and you, more than most, know the legal veracity of that.

[Baron1710]

Originally Posted by bishoph

So now, you would try to impugn the man you previously used to support your view. Further, you speak of these things as though you were personally there......if that is the case then you certainly can say what you saw/heard.....otherwise (unless you have been told it by one or more of those directly involved) it is hearsay, and you, more than most, know the legal veracity of that.

First, you have no idea what hearsay is. You have no idea what the exceptions to hearsay are. I was a student at CLC when the event occurred and have spoken directly to those involved, so I do have a pretty good idea of what happened. I also know one of those who worked actively to get rid of LY, he was my pastor, a man I greatly admired at one time. I was shocked at his view that students asking questions was a threat.