Pastors Leading the flock???)

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>This is from the Lord, BTW:
>
>Luke 6:42
>Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote
>that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in
>thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye,
>and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy
>brother's eye.
>
>This is from me:
>
>What *I* said was in reference to what was SAID!!!  What is it that you have
>inpuned???  What have you critisized?  What I said was not against the
>PERSON, but the OPINION stated and the manner in which it is stated.



Hmmmmm I would request of you to read on with your chosen scripture that you
have listed above.  I think that after your private post to a few of the
list members that v. 43-45 would speak volumes as to your true intent.

What you said was a based on a WRONG assumption as to what was being said.
Based on what Bro Reed tried unsuccessfuly to point out to you in this post:

<<Mike B4:
 No.  I am not telling you that.  If you will reread the post that you cut
 and
 paste you will see that Skip had a little problem finding the word "obey"
in
 Heb.13:17.   M.R.
 
 TimB4:
 Actually, if it says obey, then you had very well BETTER obey.  There are
no
 qualification to that verse ACCORDING TO Y'ALL,  so that does mean to do
 everything.  ***Everything***  'Less of course you are wrong....
  
 Mike: 
 Come on Tim!  His (Skip's) point was that the word "obey" was not in Heb.
13:17 and he blasted someone for using it.  I was merely pointing out that
the
word *is* in the scripture! Please pay attention.>>

You are of course incorrect as to your assumption.


This is what I impugned.  Your private post shows more then anything that
your statements were indeed directed at Bro Reed, and not the opinion and
manner in which it was stated.

If it were prudent I would post them, but I feel, after already recieving
posts from other memebers of the list that I have acted improperly. 
However, if these self same individual memebers were made privy to your
private posts I would of course be vindicated by your own words.

Bro Tim:
Do you who calls another man 'crass' exhibit crassness?  Well, we ALL have
seen the answer to that one....

Me:
If by me stating what was plainly obvious can be construd as crass, then
what would it be called if I were to simply state that your entire post was
in a word...........Garbage.........of course followed by the definition of
the word.........lets try and set this right......You publicly apologize to
Bro Reed for your crassness and I will publicly apologize for my
crassness........fair enough??

Bro Tim:
A proper rebuke is not just name calling and venting.  A
proper rebuke is not just to degrade the person and put them in their place.
A proper rebuke is to show the person their error.  I made none.

Me:
If what you recieved from my post was name calling and venting then you have
misread it.  I provided the definitions of all the words that you seemingly
have characterized as sticks and stones.  My intent was to point out with
the strongest words available to me what your manner was showing itself to
be. What I said was not against the PERSON OR OPINION, but rather the MANNER
in which it was delivered.

Jeff Wescott
(Feeling an awful lot of tension in the room.....or is it just me) :-)