Sorry, but I didn't read Glenn's post and had no knowledge of it until now.
Besides, your point here doesn't affect my complaint about your whining.
>Indeed, Steve is here saying that the "subject matter" of my post, which was
>about "a gross breach of Christian ethics by a fellow TE/EC" is OK by him,
>but the "tone" of my post calling attention to that gross breach of Christian
>ethics is not OK.
Sorry again, but I have never stated any opinion about the subject of your
post. My point is that the whining, which still persists, detracts from
the substance of your messages. It was a plea to a reasonable person to
tone it down and to stick to the real issue.
>
>The fact is that the "subject matter" of my post had *everything* to do
>with Steve's "response" and his claim that he was only concerned about my
>"tone" is just a smokescreen to try to deflect attention from it.
>
>SC>You could have stated your
>>complaint and focused on the issue without the whining and your point would
>>have been made..
>
>Steve's perception that I am "whining" is all in his head. All along I have
>pointed out that I am not "hurt" at at all by Glenn's actions of posting
>a demonstrably false story about me allegedly driving away all the "powerful
>thinkers on this list" within 3 months of me joining.
It's too bad that the perception of whining has not entered your head.
Because your posts would be enhanced considerably if it had and you avoided
it.
>
>Indeed I am *glad* that Glenn got caught out telling a false story about me!
>I regard it as a God-send (literally).
In defense of Glenn, not long after you joined the reflector, I complained
about the nature and argumentiveness of your posts. While I wouldn't
include myself as one of the "powerful thinkers" here, I leave your
messages largely unread because you seemed more fond of rhetoric than
reasoned argument. Your messages detracted from my enjoyment of the debate
on the reflector. Indeed, you and a few others contributed to my reduced
participation here. So, Glenn was not far off at all. For some reason,
last week I was curious about whether you were still making contentious and
presumptuous posts. The message I chose to examine was the one that
contained your whining about Glenn but that offered little substance.
Below you accuse me of being self righteous but then you direct me to
reflect on Isaiah 5:20! Above and below you take great liberties in
"revealing" my apparent agenda to detract from the substance of your
message. With this, you simply turn my plea to you around to use it as a
complaint against me--a rhetoric tool of the sophists. I conclude that the
style and content of your posts has not changed in the last couple of years
and I will go back to ignoring them.
Steve
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>SC>But your self-righteous indignation detracts from the
>>substance of your message. So, grow up!
>
>See above. Steve is not concerned that my "tone" "detracts from the
>substance of" my "message". Steve is *trying* to detract "from the
>substance of my message"!
>
>It says something about the adverse effect of naturalistic evolutionary
>thinking on otherwise fine Christians like Steve, that they can pervert
>*real* "righteous indignation" about a very *real* wrongdoing by a fellow
>TE/EC against a brother Christian who is a creationist, into "self-righteous
>indignation". Steve should reflect on Isaiah 5:20!
>
>Indeed the real problem here is TE/EC *lack* of "indignation" against the
>*real* wrongdoer, namely Glenn, a fellow TE/EC.
>
>But I repeat, I am not complaining about it *at all* in the sense of being
>personally hurt, because I wasn't. What I am doing is pointing about the
>failure of TE/ECs to apply Christian principles to Glenn's gross breach of
>Christian (let alone the world's) ethics.
>
>And I am not doing this for any personal sympathy. I am doing it to make a
>critique of the TE/ECs position, in the same way that other positions have
>been critiques on this Reflector, eg. YEC, PC, etc.
>
>My critique of the TE/EC position is that Christian TE/ECs who are excusing
>their fellow TE/EC Glenn's gross breach of Christian ethics, have been taken
>"captive" by a "hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human
>tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ"
>(Col 2:8), namely scientific materialism-naturalism. This captivity is such
>that TE/ECs do not even *see* that there is a gross breach of Christian
ethics,
>and they attack the one upon the breach was made.
>
>To TE/ECs who excuse Glenn's reprhensible conduct, the "E" controls the
>Christian "T"! This is a legitimate critique of the TE/EC position, and I
>expect TE/ECs to debate it rationally and not counter-attack with ad
>hominemns. If I am wide of the mark, they should be able to refute my
>hypothesis, and/or offer an alternative explanation.
>
>Please not that I am trying not blame the TE/ECs themselves personally. I
>assume that TE/ECs are otherwise fine Christians, who may sincerely *think*
>that they are doing right (Jn 16:2). I blame the "hollow and deceptive
>philosophy", namely scientific materialism-naturalism, which has taken
>TE/ECs "captive"!
>
>Steve
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>"Present-day ultra-Darwinism, which is so sure of itself, impresses
>incompletely informed biologists, misleads them, and inspires fallacious
>interpretations." (Grasse P.-P., "Evolution of Living Organisms: Evidence
>for a New Theory of Transformation", Academic Press: New York NY,
>1977, p6)
>Stephen E. Jones | sejones@iinet.net.au | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sejones
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>