***News Flash: Two more ministerial forums ????***

[D. Wright]

Originally Posted by rrford

Interesting. Why not just as easily, since you do not know the politics behind the scenes (if indeed there were any), assume they were not saying they were leaving?

It read as if he were leaving.

[Charnock]

Originally Posted by Bro. Dwight

It read as if he were leaving.

Bro. Dwight, give it up friend.

Logic will not work.

[stmatthew]

Bro Ford,

I can admit that if I had not already known of the thread prior to reading it that I would have taken it that the writer was leaving. Mainly because I normally just skim longer posts and would have possibly not caught the intent. But after the writer stated plainly that his intent in the post was not to write a farewell letter, I was completely satisfied that this was the case. It amazes me that some can so easily level a charge of lying.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Charnock

Bro. Dwight, give it up friend.

Logic will not work.

Oh, indeed logic will work. What does not work is reading something and putting your own context into it. But of course you have taken a position that is indefensible and will continue to defend it. Ask me if I am surprised?

[rrford]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Bro Ford,

I can admit that if I had not already known of the thread prior to reading it that I would have taken it that the writer was leaving. Mainly because I normally just skim longer posts and would have possibly not caught the intent. But after the writer stated plainly that his intent in the post was not to write a farewell letter, I was completely satisfied that this was the case. It amazes me that some can so easily level a charge of lying.

Without posting too much of the "original" too many folks overlooked the words in the opening paragraph "I am content." Those are not the words of leaving. Sorry. Everything that followed after, when read in context, made perfect sense. The author immediately pointed to that statement in particualr in his repsonse.

Oh, well. Tell me again why I am here even trying to explain? Expecially to folks that hold tenaciously to the "lying" charge. Free pass, I reckon.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Bro. Dwight

It read as if he were leaving.

Ahh, then you are a member that read it in its original format in its entirety?

[D. Wright]

Originally Posted by rrford

Without posting too much of the "original" too many folks overlooked the words in the opening paragraph "I am content." Those are not the words of leaving. Sorry. Everything that followed after, when read in context, made perfect sense. The author immediately pointed to that statement in particualr in his repsonse.

Oh, well. Tell me again why I am here even trying to explain? Expecially to folks that hold tenaciously to the "lying" charge. Free pass, I reckon.

When I came
When I go

If they weren't leaving yesterday it reads that the intent to leave is there.

Not sure why everyone is worked up over it.

The man can do what he wants. I would think he is to busy to worry much about it.

Blessing brothers.

[Charnock]

This game is way old. It's why I rarely post.

The misrepresentations and convolutions are annoying. Integrity is so rare.

[El Predicador]

Originally Posted by El Predicador

This whole thread is hilarious.

Accusation- "the other forum" is obsessed with AFF.

Fact- It is rarely mentioned in passing, a thread such as this would have been killed there LONG ago.


Really who are the ones obsessing??

ROFLOL

BUMP

[Amos]

Facts speak, but some would prefer to ignore them.

On "the other forum," you probably couldn't search all day and find over a dozen posts even remotely referring to AFF.

And you won't find any slamming and ripping AFF. That speaks of a certain amount of class to me.

Compare that to all the carrying on here, and tell me who has the problem.