Read Segraves on "letting down hair"

[DAII]

Originally Posted by oletime

For the record DA ?, not that im in agreement with Bd 's attemps to argue this so called hmh, But yes i would say tek has been guilty of a lot, he and his followers have had another missionary put in jail with false accusations,he was beaten terribly(this is how they roll over there, you lie to a goverment offial and they seize you immediately) and they have stolen property , property that was acquired and buildings were built on, by churches in this country , by making accusations and telling lies ,This property was then seized (i cant remember the name of this missionary, but i have heard him speak more then once ) He refused to accept the teachings of tek and has garnered a huge following of people who have left tek and his followers.

Originally Posted by BobDylan

FTR Big Flatus, I was not speaking of immorality as in sexual immorality... i was speaking of the types of immoral acts oletyme was speaking of. I have heard first hand reports from pastors who I have preached for who are in direct connection with the Ethiopia work, what was left of it after Tek exited, and the persecution of those who reject Tek's "bishoprick" and teaching. I have no evidence particularly... and I am not on any kind of effort to discredit him, have no agenda against him, no dog in the fight. Are you a Tek supporter? If so, your attempts to parallel Tek with LS has lost all credibility, in that you seem to be advocating the type of treatment toward LS that you disdained toward Tek. Speak of hypocrisy! lol....

You have to be kidding me ... here we are on page 18 of 3 threads about this discussing admittedly plausible interpretations of what LS HAS SAID ... AS WE POUR OVER RAW VIDEO, AUDIO, TRANSCRIPTS, QUOTES, BOOK EXCERPTS FROM RR and other anectdotal testimony ... and I am to take the word of second-hand, anonymous posters as to your innuendo, rumor and hearsay to the accusations you've made on a public forum about a minister who in your paradigm is Jesus name baptized and Holy Ghost filled ... with out a shred of prima facie evidence ... about his alleged IMMORALITY AND UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR

like a court docket, a newspaper article, etc. for "analysis".

I don't know Oletyme or TEK from a hole in the wall but please hold yourself to the same standard of "scholarly" citation. You say you have made no effort to discredit him after you have publicly stated he has acted IMMORRALLY and UNETHICALLY?

Keeping in mind that such an accusation was not even mundane to the the topic or necessary to throw out except as an ad-hominem attack.

TEK was brought up to show the absurdity of your "greater context and purview" argument where you admittedly think the ends justify the means ... however we are to ignore the "unfortunate", "whacky", "problematic", "misspoken", "poorly presented" details in between. And accept your uninformed apologizing for the DOCUMENTABLE words of a teacher who is being emulated by the masses.

I have had enough insight, especially in South America, to national works and big brother meddling to know that when it comes to these issues there are two sides to every story and then there is the TRUTH. Schisms are never "clean" or "antiseptic".

You sir, have defamed this man with innuendo and UNSUBSTANTIATED evidence ... while pointing fingers at those who choose to put LS public message to the fire ... while not attacking him personally.

Again, BD, will you SUBSTANTIATE THE ACCUSATIONS YOU HAVE MADE AGAINST AN APOSTOLIC MINISTER?

So far here is your evidence for your personal attack and attempt to tear down this man's ministry:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by DAII

You have to be kidding me ... here we are on page 18 of 3 threads about this discussing admittedly plausible interpretations of what LS HAS SAID ... AS WE POUR OVER RAW VIDEO, AUDIO, TRANSCRIPTS, QUOTES, BOOK EXCERPTS FROM RR and other anectdotal testimony ... and I am to take the word of second-hand, anonymous posters as to your innuendo, rumor and hearsay to the accusations you've made on a public forum about a minister who in your paradigm is Jesus name baptized and Holy Ghost filled ... with out a shred of prima facie evidence ... about his alleged IMMORALITY AND UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR

like a court docket, a newspaper article, etc. for "analysis".

I don't know Oletyme or TEK from a hole in the wall but please hold yourself to the same standard of "scholarly" citation. You say you have made no effort to discredit him after you have publicly stated he has acted IMMORRALLY and UNETHICALLY?

Keeping in mind that such an accusation was not even mundane to the the topic or necessary to throw out except as an ad-hominem attack.

TEK was brought up to show the absurdity of your "greater context and purview" argument where you admittedly think the ends justify the means ... however we are to ignore the "unfortunate", "whacky", "problematic", "misspoken", "poorly presented" details in between. And accept your uninformed apologizing for the DOCUMENTABLE words of a teacher who is being emulated by the masses.

I have had enough insight, especially in South America, to national works and big brother meddling to know that when it comes to these issues there are two sides to every story and then there is the TRUTH. Schisms are never "clean" or "antiseptic".

You sir, have defamed this man with innuendo and UNSUBSTANTIATED evidence ... while pointing fingers at those who choose to put LS public message to the fire ... while not attacking him personally.

Again, BD, will you SUBSTANTIATE THE ACCUSATIONS YOU HAVE MADE AGAINST AN APOSTOLIC MINISTER?
So far here is your evidence for your personal attack and attempt to tear down this man's ministry:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

One itsy, bitsy shred to analyze would be nice.

Dial up, problems?

The duplicity and obfuscation has spoken volumes.

[DAII]

Originally Posted by DAII

One itsy, bitsy shred to analyze would be nice.

Dial up, problems?

The duplicity and obfuscation has spoken volumes.

Please substantiate your public accusations of IMMORALITY AND UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR of AN APOSTOLIC MINISTER?

Tell you what ... it's a good thing you've chosen to go anonymous with your postings apologizing for HMH and seeking to fill in the gaps for what LS has not said .... as this may stay linked to you for a very long, long, time. I'm sure many of your ministerial peers have noticed where you stand on this heresy at AMF.

The ends don't justify the means, Tyke.

And .... Champ, I am going to keep asking until you play by your rules and demands.

My flow is smoooooooooooth cuz I'm Mr. Biggie.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by DAII

Please substantiate your accusations of IMMORALITY AND UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR of AN APOSTOLIC MINISTER?

Tell you what ... it's a good thing you've chosen to go anonymous with your postings apologizing for HMH and seeking to fill in the gaps for what LS has not said .... as this may stay linked to you for a very long, long, time. I'm sure many of your ministerial peers have noticed where you stand on this heresy at AMF.

Then ends don't justify the means, Tyke.

Champ, I am going to keep asking until you play by your rules and demands.

My flow is smoooooooooooth cuz I'm Mr. Biggie.

Laffable.... Lol.... I haven't accused Tek of anything.... I used an ambiguous word "immoral"... If he has ever told a lie, that would fall under the heading of immoral. If he has propogated a false teaching in defiance of the consensus of ministering brethren, it would be immoral. If he has ever treated a brother less than admirably, it would be unethical... That is te extent to which I am prepared to substantiate what I said. This line of thought is clearly obfuscating and misdirecting, since you are the one who brought Tek into the discussion and are intent to pursue a conversation about him. As far as my ministerial friends, my reputation is intact. Those who know me can sit down and chat and find out where I'm coming from, those who don't but would like to, I'd be glad to get to know them, even in disagreement. Lol... You attempts at intimidation and misdirection ate futile. You can't handle reason, so your little games are all you have left! One day the game will be over....

[dizzyde]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

Laffable.... Lol.... I haven't accused Tek of anything.... I used an ambiguous word "immoral"... If he has ever told a lie, that would fall under the heading of immoral. If he has ever treated a brother less than admirably, it would be unethical... That is te extent to which I am prepared to substantiate what I said. This line of thought is clearly obfuscating and misdirecting, since you are the one who brought Tek into the discussion and are intent to pursue a conversation about him. As far as my ministerial friends, my reputation is intact. Those who know me can sit down and chat and find out where I'm coming from, those who don't but would like to, I'd be glad to get to know them, even in disagreement. Lol... You attempts at intimidation and misdirection ate futile. You can't handle reason, so your little games are all you have left! One day the game will be over....

WOW!!!! You really do not believe that people have to be accountable for what they say, do you?

I guess that would explain quite a bit, you are operating on a whole different code of ethics than most other humans.

Again, it makes it very clear why it does absolutely no good to argue with you, you just do not have the capability to speak truth or operate within the confines of sane reasoning. It really is very sad.

[BobDylan]

Originally Posted by dizzyde

WOW!!!! You really do not believe that people have to be accountable for what they say, do you?

I guess that would explain quite a bit, you are operating on a whole different code of ethics than most other humans.

Again, it makes it very clear why it does absolutely no good to argue with you, you just do not have the capability to speak truth or operate within the confines of sane reasoning. It really is very sad.

Clearly you couldn't argue yorself out of a wet paper bag, thus the preoccupation with obfuscation by tangential issues not even associated with the discussion at hand. Tek this Tek that...

[dizzyde]

Originally Posted by BobDylan

Clearly you couldn't argue yorself out of a wet paper bag, thus the preoccupation with obfuscation by tangential issues not even associated with the discussion at hand. Tek this Tek that...

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by dizzyde

WOW!!!! You really do not believe that people have to be accountable for what they say, do you?

I guess that would explain quite a bit, you are operating on a whole different code of ethics than most other humans.

Again, it makes it very clear why it does absolutely no good to argue with you, you just do not have the capability to speak truth or operate within the confines of sane reasoning. It really is very sad.

It was unfortunate, but most likely intentional so he could come back later and spin what he said into something else

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by dizzyde

WOW!!!! You really do not believe that people have to be accountable for what they say, do you?

I guess that would explain quite a bit, you are operating on a whole different code of ethics than most other humans.

Again, it makes it very clear why it does absolutely no good to argue with you, you just do not have the capability to speak truth or operate within the confines of sane reasoning. It really is very sad.

Originally Posted by Praxeas

It was unfortunate, but most likely intentional so he could come back later and spin what he said into something else

It's the same ol' same ol' ... "Touch not mine anointed..."

Those who object say: "But the so-called 'anointed' isn't even preaching out of the Bible! He's preaching out of an encyclopedia on witchcraft... !!!"

Those who protect false doctrine say: "You just have a bad attitude... or your (sic) bitter... or you don't understand my superior powers of reasoning to be anything other than sycophantic boot-licking..."