A Walk Through the New Testament

JD,

I went back and read the thread.
I do think I owe you a personal apology because I think I finally get what you were trying to say. I still don't agree with you, but what you were trying to say is NOT what I thought you were, which is what made me angry.

I read your intended meaning to be that the woman had to seek forgiveness before she got God's love.

In going back, I see that your intended meaning was that she had received mercy, so she loved.

I still think that the verse literally means she was forgiven BECAUSE she loved. So we still disagree on interpretations, but since you were not teaching "God will love you after you ask forgiveness," I owe you an apology.

 

As to the words to Billy Mac above -

No, there was not a connection between the two threads in my reaction to you, though now that you've pointed out that you are the same person, I wonder how much of YOUR reaction is because of the two threads.

You seemed to go out of your way in the thread about the family to twist my intentions and to paint a false portrayal of what happened and what was said.

I told people I was asked by a friend if they should give a reference for a man that they had doubts about. We had both been wittness to the same events that gave us doubts about the man. My reaction to that person was to pray and to perhaps do a little more investigation themselves before they decided on whether to recommend or not.

My reason for that is simple. To refuse a recommendation would have raised eyebrows and possibly resulted in the man being denied a pulpit that he might deserve. To grant a recommendation, when there ARE doubts, would be cheating the church that asked for an honest appraisal of the man.

In asking YOU all if I did the right thing, I explained WHY I had doubts.

I did not give the man's location.

I did not give the juicy details of it all, despite JD's belief I did. I did state that his children and wife express fear of him. I didn't go into the nitty gritty of how they expressed it or why. I did tell you some of the things his children did that came out in front of the whole church. Facts, not gossip, that were made known to us by the parties involved when they sought out our help in picking up the pieces. The fact is, one of the reasons this person left this area is to get a fresh start where people will NOT know the things that are known here. What I DID post, to explain the gravity of the situation, doesn't even scartch the surface of the severity of what actually went on and became matters of public records.

I did not tell you what state he was in, what state he is going to, how many kids he has.

I did this to give a clear picture of why I had doubts.

I asked for advice because later I felt guilty for NOT telling my friend to tell the search committee everything they knew.

If it was MY Pastor, I'd want to KNOW those things.

I felt I'd told my friend to comitt a lie of obmission. So I came to you and asked the people on this board what you would do, given those circumstances.

At which point, JD declared me a gossip monger.

I find it funny that its NOT gossiping to sit around talking about Michael Jackson, Billy Graham, and Pastors that hit the young man who slept with their child, but it IS gossip to ask a question about a nameless person.

I also find it interesting that you think Christians should be held to higher standards, but in expressing questions about how high the standard should be you say, explaining what concerns you is gossip.

By that thinking were the people who testified at the Jackson trial just gossips?

Interesting standards.

 

And, though you have not asked for it, I forgive you for your hateful and false accusations against me.

 

AVL...haven't people tried to twist things TS said? Nobody likes their words twisted, not you, not me and most probably not TS.

So...where are we on our walk through the New Testament...oh yes...look here...1 Corinthians 13.

 

AVL...it seems to me that TS is correcting false doctrine as well.