My Response to "The Devolution of Government - Globally & in the Church" by the NCO

Originally Posted by James Griffin

With all due respect I do not see where CC1 said HE did not know.

Second I have yet to see a discuss on the premise of the original article :-)

Why is it the 800 gorilla in the room everyone choses to ignore????

True, CC1 did not say he did not know... you are right and I was wrong.

I can not speak for PP... as for me and my house, we addressed the original article with the same veracity and honesty of heart that try to address everything I post. And I did agree with and support your article. I did not find anything in your article that was offensive or out of line. I can't say the same for the other two articles referenced from the NCO site but you didn't write them.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

With all due respect I do not see where CC1 said HE did not know.

Second I have yet to see a discuss on the premise of the original article :-)

Why is it the 800 gorilla in the room everyone choses to ignore????

Misrepresenting what people say or their view seems to be a favorite tactic of some of the conservatives. I guess the concept is that if you can't defeat them in the arena of ideas then just distort their ideas into something you can attack.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by philjones

True, CC1 did not say he did not know... you are right and I was wrong.

I can not speak for PP... as for me and my house, we addressed the original article with the same veracity and honesty of heart that try to address everything I post. And I did agree with and support your article. I did not find anything in your article that was offensive or out of line. I can't say the same for the other two articles referenced from the NCO site but you didn't write them.

philjones,

My point is that what PP is complaining about is a man's experience and opinon. One that he expressed without calling names, etc.

If you take away the ability for men to honestly express themselves then the UPC, NCO, ALJC, AMF, etc will all have nothing to say worth a hoot.

Conflict may not be pleasant but nothing ever changes without it. Disagreement, dissension, constructive criticism, etc all have their place in the dialogue of Christianity.

Originally Posted by CC1

Misrepresenting what people say or their view seems to be a favorite tactic of some of the conservatives. I guess the concept is that if you can't defeat them in the arena of ideas then just distort their ideas into something you can attack.

CC1,

IF this post was directed at me... I confessed my error. It would be refreshing if you would occasionally do the same... but then liberals are never wrong.

I find your post to be a great encouragement for unity you conservative hater!

Originally Posted by CC1

philjones,

My point is that what PP is complaining about is a man's experience and opinon. One that he expressed without calling names, etc.

If you take away the ability for men to honestly express themselves then the UPC, NCO, ALJC, AMF, etc will all have nothing to say worth a hoot.

Conflict may not be pleasant but nothing ever changes without it. Disagreement, dissension, constructive criticism, etc all have their place in the dialogue of Christianity.

CC1,

If I did everything to identify you BUT call your name and pointed out your flaws as facts even though they are really my opinion, would you not be offended?

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by philjones

True, CC1 did not say he did not know... you are right and I was wrong.

I can not speak for PP... as for me and my house, we addressed the original article with the same veracity and honesty of heart that try to address everything I post. And I did agree with and support your article. I did not find anything in your article that was offensive or out of line. I can't say the same for the other two articles referenced from the NCO site but you didn't write them.

Thank you.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by CC1

philjones,

My point is that what PP is complaining about is a man's experience and opinon. One that he expressed without calling names, etc.

If you take away the ability for men to honestly express themselves then the UPC, NCO, ALJC, AMF, etc will all have nothing to say worth a hoot.

Conflict may not be pleasant but nothing ever changes without it. Disagreement, dissension, constructive criticism, etc all have their place in the dialogue of Christianity.

Three points (again).

1. The NCO needs to make its own way without bashing the UPC. I feel like the articles by Saulters and Langston are improper, and show a motive on the part of NCO to draw men out of the UPC. Especially the article titled "A Place for You." Saulters makes a specific appeal to men from the UPC to come and join him.

Look folks, no one on AFF has ever considered me a conservative or organizational apologist - so I find your willingness to paint me as one hilarious. The truth is, I am objective. I don't drink conservative kool-aid, and I sure ain't gonna drink Charismatic kool-aid either.

2. It is hypocritical to call for unity (as this article does) while at the same time bashing a sister organization for standards that you disagree with.

3. Brother Griffin, the idea that I haven't addressed the original content of your article is silly. I have spent way too much time addressing it. You just choose to ingore, or dislike, my response.

[James Griffin]

Originally Posted by philjones

CC1,

If I did everything to identify you BUT call your name and pointed out your flaws as facts even though they are really my opinion, would you not be offended?

I would not deny you the right to express your opinion about YOUR journey if it were done in terms that were about your perception of what happened and also without naming nor maligning individuals. His journey is his, just as yours and mine are unique.

But I also know how to differentiate the expressions of individuals from the stance of a fellowship. In that vein even though there have been individuals in this forum who have attacked the NCO by name, and personal attacks on some individuals I have never responded in kind. True Christians should be able to have frank discussions without personal attack. The ADMIN of this site seem to sincerely make attempts to keep that from happening and for the most part they are successful.

The RS article was about a thought paradigm, which could be applied to any denomination. Apparently no one has taken time to read other articles he has written since.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by CC1

philjones,

My point is that what PP is complaining about is a man's experience and opinon. One that he expressed without calling names, etc.

If you take away the ability for men to honestly express themselves then the UPC, NCO, ALJC, AMF, etc will all have nothing to say worth a hoot.

Conflict may not be pleasant but nothing ever changes without it. Disagreement, dissension, constructive criticism, etc all have their place in the dialogue of Christianity.

I disagree because I believe Brother Griffin is now saying the NCO is something different than what the website blatantly shows them to be.

I disagree because there is an obvious effort to draw men out of the UPC, written by Saulters, and now denied by Griffin.

I disagree because if the NCO is only an affiliation, whose stated goal is unity and ecumenicalism, the articles I have mentioned pervert that purpose.


In short, the AFF posts and purpose, as stated by Griffin, do not match the content of the NCO's site.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

I would not deny you the right to express your opinion about YOUR journey if it were done in terms that were about your perception of what happened and also without naming nor maligning individuals. His journey is his, just as yours and mine are unique.

But I also know how to differentiate the expressions of individuals from the stance of a fellowship. In that vein even though there have been individuals in this forum who have attacked the NCO by name, and personal attacks on some individuals I have never responded in kind. True Christians should be able to have frank discussions without personal attack. The ADMIN of this site seem to sincerely make attempts to keep that from happening and for the most part they are successful.

The RS article was about a thought paradigm, which could be applied to any denomination. Apparently no one has taken time to read other articles he has written since.

I categorically deny this statement. How can you deny he referred to the UPC? He even went so far as to use our motto "the whole gospel to the whole world."

He then called for others to come out as he did.