--------------AD3E6293FF32FD1CC783C9D5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Fivefree@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 5/26/99 12:26:10 PM Mountain Daylight Time,
> gandrews@as.wm.edu writes:
>
> << The price of free expression is passionate debate which - unfortunately -
> often
> leads to sarcasm and temper. This is true of Jesus and his disciples as
> well as
> the prophets of old. While its absence is more effective to the changing of
> minds, sarcasm will occur and should be tolerated as part of the human
> condition.
>
> The stakes are high in the pursuit of truth.
>
> George
> >>
> This isn't sarcasm, it's thinly veiled hate. Pure, plain and simple. Puhlease
> don't bring Jesus, the apostles and the prophets into this. They all knew
> intimately the Spirit of truth and had pure discernment into circumstances
> they were dealing with.
I'll let Dick defend himself, but it is indeed sarcasm and not necessarily hate
in that it is "hostile", "cutting" and "contemptuous" in its tone which are the
defining terms of sarcasm ( among others). I stand by my reference to Christ and
his apostles and prophets in that this is precisely the tone of Mat. 23 where
Jesus behaves very "unchristian like" in his sarcastic - not hateful - retort to
the pettifogging pharisees. And of course, I had the splendid sarcasm of Elija
aimed at the prophets of Baal in second Kings 18 in mind as well.
Your point concerning Christ's and the apostles' "intimacy" as affording special
privilege in judgment - while true - is moot to Dick's attack; he (Dick) doesn't
require supernatural abilities in discernment in this issue; only sound
scientific and theological sense.
I've read on this list has a deep intimate relationship knowing the voice and
presence of the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit (they each have a
distinctiveness you know). Only they now all about the geologic past.
Everything else is an indirect assumption. Wouldn't you agree?
Well, this is a bit rash. What intimate knowledge of us do you posses for such
damning pronouncement? (Excuse my sarcasm :-) )
>
> Oh and by the way, I have a degree in Geology, worked in the oil exploration
> industry for 12 years, belonged to most professional organizations in geology
> (AAPG, GSA, SEPM, etc.) and have 1/2 a masters.
>
> JM Jackson
Is this for me?
Sincerely
George
--------------AD3E6293FF32FD1CC783C9D5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
Fivefree@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 5/26/99 12:26:10 PM Mountain Daylight Time,I'll let Dick defend himself, but it is indeed sarcasm and not necessarily hate in that it is "hostile", "cutting" and "contemptuous" in its tone which are the defining terms of sarcasm ( among others). I stand by my reference to Christ and his apostles and prophets in that this is precisely the tone of Mat. 23 where Jesus behaves very "unchristian like" in his sarcastic - not hateful - retort to the pettifogging pharisees. And of course, I had the splendid sarcasm of Elija aimed at the prophets of Baal in second Kings 18 in mind as well.
gandrews@as.wm.edu writes:<< The price of free expression is passionate debate which - unfortunately -
often
leads to sarcasm and temper. This is true of Jesus and his disciples as
well as
the prophets of old. While its absence is more effective to the changing of
minds, sarcasm will occur and should be tolerated as part of the human
condition.The stakes are high in the pursuit of truth.
George
>>
This isn't sarcasm, it's thinly veiled hate. Pure, plain and simple. Puhlease
don't bring Jesus, the apostles and the prophets into this. They all knew
intimately the Spirit of truth and had pure discernment into circumstances
they were dealing with.
Your point concerning Christ's and the apostles' "intimacy" as affording special privilege in judgment - while true - is moot to Dick's attack; he (Dick) doesn't require supernatural abilities in discernment in this issue; only sound scientific and theological sense.
From lurking on this list I can tell you that nobody
I've read on this list has a deep intimate relationship knowing the
voice and
presence of the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit (they each have a
distinctiveness you know). Only they now all about the geologic past.
Everything else is an indirect assumption. Wouldn't you agree?
Well, this is a bit rash. What intimate knowledge of us do you posses for such damning pronouncement? (Excuse my sarcasm :-) )
Oh and by the way, I have a degree in Geology, worked in the oil exploration
industry for 12 years, belonged to most professional organizations in geology
(AAPG, GSA, SEPM, etc.) and have 1/2 a masters.JM Jackson
Is this for me?
Sincerely
George
--------------AD3E6293FF32FD1CC783C9D5--
--------------63C5A03DEFD2247C9037AD9D
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
name="gandrews.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for George Andrews
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="gandrews.vcf"
begin:vcard
n:Andrews Jr.;George
tel;home:757 565 2890
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
org:College of William & Mary;Applied Sciences
adr:;;;Williamsburg;VA;23188;
version:2.1
email;internet:gandrews@as.wm.edu
title:Graduate Student
fn:George A. Andrews Jr.
end:vcard
--------------63C5A03DEFD2247C9037AD9D--