Hope For All To Clay
Guest
|
Post by Hope For All To Clay on Aug 17, 2006 18:08:19 GMT -5
Clay, please change the title to this thread. Personally, I find it offensive, and not worthy of you, nor your beliefs. To me it is as much of a personal attack as any post here.
Have you never heard of a self-fulfilling prophesy? Could you not be creating one by such a title? To my mind, Howard has shown considerable growth in maturity and restraint in his posts even though you still try to press his buttons. As I said, to me, such things are unworthy of you and what you profess to believe. There are many things Howard writes with which I agree, just as there are many things you write with which I agree.
Either you two accept each other as brethren in the Lord, or you do not. If you are brethren in the Lord, then are you not obligated to focus upon common beliefs which bring unity and friendship between you? I doubt that oppositional posts will change the views of either one of you, nor those of anyone reading along, so why continue?
Like Linda, I know none asked for my thoughts, but I do have them and offer them for consideration. If they contain no wisdom, then they are indeed as chaff in the wind and are to be ignored.
Kind regards,
Dennis Clay, I fully agree with what Dennis has asked here. Why have you not changed the header?? I also find it offensive. I find your posts are too often laced with sarcasim and lash out at others. You appear to be awfully defensive. Why is that?? Your intense feelings against NB and now Howard are clear and hardly Christian like. It seems to me that this is a very personal thing with you. Sooooo... Lighten Up Man!! HFA
|
|
|
Post by ClayRandall on Aug 17, 2006 18:20:58 GMT -5
And here I thought that I had lightened up......
Tell me, HFA, why is it that you've never rebuked Howard for what he says?
|
|
|
Post by HUCK on Aug 17, 2006 19:16:24 GMT -5
Howard either is too sloppy in his quoting of the website he linked to, or he intentionally neglected to mention #5. 5. Because the Church is necessary for salvation with the necessity of precept, any person who knows the Church to have been divinely instituted by Our Lord and yet refuses to enter it or to remain within it cannot attain eternal salvation. Didn't you notice, Clay, that I posted the link in Reply #53? Through his unbelief, Howard does not "know" the Catholic Church; therefore, the quotes regarding no salvation outside the Catholic Church do not apply to him. I fail to see what Catholicism has to offer when: 1. Complying to Catholicism and it's claims of providing salvation doesn't apply to be because I'm not a Catholic. I wouldn't even be offered communion, allowed to be baptized or receive other sacraments unless I joined their church and confessed the pope as my spiritual father. 2. Quotes regarding "no salvation outside the RCC" do not apply to me because I do not believe them. (as Clay said). 3. My chances of obtaining eternal life are thus ...."but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation" (LG 16; cf. DS 3866-3872). Many on this board DO seek God with a sincere heart and try to do his will as they know it. (I might add that they do this through prayer both before and after accepting Him as Lord as an act in seeking His face). Just what does Catholicism have to offer in all this? After all the denials that anything applies to non-Catholics that I've read on that site (http://www.truecatholic.org/cathsalv.htm) and that Clay offers, it seems that Catholicism is of very little or no importance at all in the quest for salvation. Obviously the Catholic Church is NOT necessary for salvation as they teach their followers. Am I missing something? Howard
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Aug 17, 2006 22:03:58 GMT -5
This is interesting. A non or ex F&W putting a person on a pedestal, whose "position" here on these boards is now become a measure for truth rather than God's Holy Word, in that he is a "most respected person." This sounds a lot like the F&W tendency to elevate the workers.
Deut 1:17, 16:19 Prov 24:23, 28:21 Acts 10:34, Rom 2:11, Eph 6:9
I Sam 16:7 (ESV) But the LORD said to Samuel, do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature; because I have rejected him. For the LORD sees not as man sees; man looks on outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart.
Christ's Forever, Jessi
|
|
|
Post by ClayRandall on Aug 18, 2006 6:13:28 GMT -5
This is interesting. A non or ex F&W putting a person on a pedestal, whose "position" here on these boards is now become a measure for truth rather than God's Holy Word, in that he is a "most respected person." This sounds a lot like the F&W tendency to elevate the workers. Deut 1:17, 16:19 Prov 24:23, 28:21 Acts 10:34, Rom 2:11, Eph 6:9 I'm sorry, Jessi, but that is simply ridiculous. There's nothing wrong with holding someone in high regard. Just because I have a lot of respect and affection for Rob doesn't mean I've "put him on a pedestal". With that said, your point that what a person says should be considered without total regard to his or her stature on the TMB is a reasonable one.
|
|
|
Post by Hope For All on Aug 18, 2006 9:41:16 GMT -5
And here I thought that I had lightened up...... Tell me, HFA, why is it that you've never rebuked Howard for what he says? Dear Clay, You are the one who started a public thread with a header that I find offensive -as do other "well respected posters". As Dennis already pointed out- you have waved a huge red flag in front of Howard by using a very derogatory term- and then cried wolf when he responds in kind. Hardly surprising is it? Peace, HFA
|
|
|
Post by ClayRandall on Aug 18, 2006 17:48:16 GMT -5
And here I thought that I had lightened up...... Tell me, HFA, why is it that you've never rebuked Howard for what he says? Dear Clay, You are the one who started a public thread with a header that I find offensive -as do other "well respected posters". As Dennis already pointed out- you have waved a huge red flag in front of Howard by using a very derogatory term- and then cried wolf when he responds in kind. Hardly surprising is it? Peace, HFA Dear HFA, As usual, your sense of history is more than slightly off if you are not aware that 95% of Howard's input here is the initial "red flag". I am simply telling it like I see it, just like brave Howard is. According to Wikipedia, "in Internet terminology, a troll is someone who comes into an established community such as an online discussion forum, and posts inflammatory, rude, repetitive or offensive messages designed intentionally to annoy or antagonize the existing members or disrupt the flow of discussion, including the personal attack of calling others trolls." And yes, I recognize the irony of that last statement as it pertains to what I have said about Howard! :-) LOL
|
|
|
Post by HUCk on Aug 19, 2006 13:30:03 GMT -5
....and the Trolls lived happily ever after !
|
|
|
Post by HFA on Aug 19, 2006 14:02:04 GMT -5
And the big TROLL said, "Who dares come across my bridge?" ;D
|
|