Outer Darkness?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

Sorry if I didn't express it simple enough for you to understand.

We don't try to be an overcomer. We try to please God.

We try to please God by being an overcomer.

We please God by
a) not trying to be an overcomer? or
b) trying to be an overcomer?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

We try to please God by being an overcomer.

We please God by
a) not trying to be an overcomer? or
b) trying to be an overcomer?

Do you purposely try to misunderstand every other poster?

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Do you purposely try to misunderstand every other poster?

I doubt that Evangelical misunderstands. He knows exactly what he's doing. Why do I say this? In his own words:

Originally Posted by Evangelical

This is hilarious given what you wrote a few posts ago and contains more "crapola" than anyone else has written. Straw-man's are part and parcel of this sort of discussion - grow up and get over it. I'm not asking for respect, I'm questioning ... .

This post was written to me awhile back on another thread. Click on the little blue arrow for more context. If you find yourself going round and round in circles with him, like the last few "E-posts", just remember that according to Evangelical, that's "part and parcel of this sort of discussion", and you should "grow up." (Mutual respect is not important to him.)

Nell

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Nell

I doubt that Evangelical misunderstands. He knows exactly what he's doing. Why do I say this? In his own words:



This post was written to me. Follow the link for more context. If you find yourself chasing your tail, like the last few "E-posts", just remember that according to Evangelical, that's "part and parcel of this sort of discussion", and you should "grow up." (Mutual respect is not important to him.)

Nell

The link is here:

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...ead.php?t=5765

Put simply, I asked about why people were rejecting the "stock standard theological resources" I was using in that discussion to show they are not so different from Lee's interpretation of the Trinity.

Nell, replied in post #158 by saying most of my posts are crapola (his word, not mine). He seemed to misunderstand that I was not asking for respect, but wondering why not only Lee is rejected but also solid theological resources.

Strawman's on both sides are part and parcel of discussion on internet forums. It's a common debate tactic, and also used in politics, sport and many other arenas. That's being pragmatic, not disrespectful or intentional.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Nell

I doubt that Evangelical misunderstands. He knows exactly what he's doing. Why do I say this? In his own words:



This post was written to me awhile back on another thread. Click on the little blue arrow for more context. If you find yourself going round and round in circles with him, like the last few "E-posts", just remember that according to Evangelical, that's "part and parcel of this sort of discussion", and you should "grow up." (Mutual respect is not important to him.)

Nell

Nell,

Did you see EvanJelly's latest cop-out -- "all he needs to do is eat the Lord"?

Where have we heard that before?

And to show how carefully he pays attention, Jelly calls you a "he."

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Nell,

Did you see EvanJelly's latest cop-out -- "all he needs to do is eat the Lord"?

Where have we heard that before?

And to show how carefully he pays attention, Jelly calls you a "he."

Ohio,

I noticed. It looks to me like all that "eating" would have produced more fruit...well I guess it has, just not the kind of fruit you want.

It also seems to me that, as believers, on a Christian forum, (I've said this before) Evangelical should understand that we try to hold to a higher standard than your common Internet food-fight. "Strawman" arguments exist for one reason...OK two reasons...deceit and deflection. I believe most of the forum members post their position on a matter with honesty and integrity without subterfuge. Most believe that "strawman" arguments are not acceptable. Not to mention a waste of time and storage space on a server. The ol' "everybody does it...part and parcel" excuse is pathetic. It never worked on my parents.

Yeah...there was a point when E-man seemed to understand that I am a woman...like on the Woman of Chayil thread maybe??? Duh. As he said in his own words...he's not looking for respect...and with that attitude he's not likely to show much toward others...hence the strawman thing.

Hopefully this will help new members get some perspective on ... things.

Nell

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Nell

Ohio,

I noticed. It looks to me like all that "eating" would have produced more fruit...well I guess it has, just not the kind of fruit you want.

It also seems to me that, as believers, on a Christian forum, (I've said this before) Evangelical should understand that we try to hold to a higher standard than your common Internet food-fight. "Strawman" arguments exist for one reason...OK two reasons...deceit and deflection. I believe most of the forum members post their position on a matter with honesty and integrity without subterfuge. Most believe that "strawman" arguments are not acceptable. Not to mention a waste of time and storage space on a server. The ol' "everybody does it...part and parcel" excuse is pathetic. It never worked on my parents.

Yeah...there was a point when E-man seemed to understand that I am a woman...like on the Woman of Chayil thread maybe??? Duh. As he said in his own words...he's not looking for respect...and with that attitude he's not likely to show much toward others...hence the strawman thing.

Hopefully this will help new members get some perspective on ... things.

Nell

Nell, he is not looking for respect? Says a bunch about him.

Without respect, there is no humanity, no civilization, no families, no marriage, no church, no nothing. Without respect, we merely begin with ad hominems, and then rapidly deteriorate. I've seen many on the internet, even a few here, that appeared to have no respect for others.

My Mom used to preach that I don't have to like everyone all the time, but I have to respect everyone all the time. Having nine kids, she was forced to do lots of preaching.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Ohio

He is not looking for respect?

There is no humanity, no civilization, no families, no church, no nothing, without respect. Without respect we merely begin with ad hominems, and then rapidly deteriorate.

My Mom used to preach that I don't have to like everyone all the time, but I have to respect everyone all the time. Having nine kids, she was forced to do lots of preaching.

Yup, Ohio. That's what he said. I guess that explains the ad hominems and deterioration. He has tried to explain, re-word, reshape, etc., but no apology, no repentance and most of all, no change in behavior.

Catherine Marshall said: "The first thing to take place in communication is respect. Without respect, communication does not take place." I think she's right.

Nell

Originally Posted by Evangelical

This is hilarious given what you wrote a few posts ago and contains more "crapola" than anyone else has written. Straw-man's are part and parcel of this sort of discussion - grow up and get over it. I'm not asking for respect, I'm questioning ... .

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Nell, he is not looking for respect? Says a bunch about him.

Without respect, there is no humanity, no civilization, no families, no marriage, no church, no nothing. Without respect, we merely begin with ad hominems, and then rapidly deteriorate. I've seen many on the internet, even a few here, that appeared to have no respect for others.

My Mom used to preach that I don't have to like everyone all the time, but I have to respect everyone all the time. Having nine kids, she was forced to do lots of preaching.

Off topic!. Moderator!

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Nell

Hopefully this will help new members get some perspective on ... things.

Nell, Thanks. He is indeed quite different from the other brothers and sisters I know in the LC.

[Drake]

Fuji )"I absolutely disagree with Lee's outer darkness thingy"

Ok, but what are you for?

The outer darkness is....?

Drake

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

Nell, Thanks. He is indeed quite different from the other brothers and sisters I know in the LC.

You are quite different as well from other brothers and sisters I know in the LC. Most in the LC are not in the Recovery with ulterior motives, as you are. You'd be a prime candidate for the outer darkness I'm sure.

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

We try to please God by being an overcomer.

We please God by
a) not trying to be an overcomer? or
b) trying to be an overcomer?

I assumie you are trying to sort things out using logic.

Let me put it this way, trying to be an overcomer is more about "me", trying to please God is more about "Him".

So will you choose (a) or (b)?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

I assumie you are trying to sort things out using logic.

Let me put it this way, trying to be an overcomer is more about "me", trying to please God is more about "Him".

So will you choose (a) or (b)?

It reminds me of Lee's teaching, that all we need to do is "eat the Lord" , everything else will be taken care of.

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It reminds me of Lee's teaching, that all we need to do is "eat the Lord" , everything else will be taken care of.

No, this is different.

I was just saying we should set the target right. I didn't say we don't need to do anything.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by A little brother

No, this is different.

I was just saying we should set the target right. I didn't say we don't need to do anything.

Then your view is no doubt summarized by this absurd position you hold:

God wants us to be an overcomer but it's wrong to try to be one.

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Then your view is no doubt summarized by this absurd position you hold:

God wants us to be an overcomer but it's wrong to try to be one.

Didn't I say "I cannot say this is totally wrong" back in post #32?