Jude 2

This looks suspiciously like a DOCTRINAL post.

Can you say "Double Standard"?

irthnvesl wrote:This looks suspiciously like a DOCTRINAL post.

Can you say "Double Standard"?

Good point. Looks that way to me, Irthnvesl.

Are doctrinal threads permissible in this forum or aren't they?

I know this should be in the just for fun forum but here goes....

An athiest and a donkey walk into a bar........

The question is are you the ass of the joke or the atheist? I'm pretty sure that you are the ass.

Was that comment really necessary?

[quote="irthnvesl"]The question is are you the ass of the joke or the atheist? I'm pretty sure that you are the ass.[/quote]

Nope! He's the bouncer!!!

No acts to grind.

I just know that dave c has posted here for years with no doctrinal debate... just an occasional devotion or whatever.

The reason there is a "doctrinal forum" is for people like you.

We made a decision as a board not to gum up the front page with endless doctrinal debate. Sorry if that offends your desire to hear yourself type.

We have never seen anyone whose personality would not allow them to enjoy the forum without attempting to dictate it being their way.

That's not fair!

Mommie they don't let me post like that.

Mommie they don't like me.

Never heard that out of anyone before.

Grow up. Things don't always go your way, the way you think it should be, or the way you want.

That's life. Deal with it in some other way than childishly picking at the mods to make things to your liking.

Rahab wrote:Was that comment really necessary?

No, Scooter's comment was not necessary. It didn't address irthnvesl's legitimate question and it was an act of cyberbullying.

scooter wrote:Grow up.

Same to you, "Bishop."

Tim Elston wrote:

irthnvesl wrote:This looks suspiciously like a DOCTRINAL post.

Can you say "Double Standard"?

Good point. Looks that way to me, Irthnvesl.

What it means is that "all are considered equal
BUT
some are more equal than others"

Tim Elston wrote:

Rahab wrote:Was that comment really necessary?

No, Scooter's comment was not necessary. It didn't address irthnvesl's legitimate question and it was an act of cyberbullying.

pot, meet the kettle...

To address irthnvesl's complaint: What is Doctrinal in dave c's devotional? Do you wish to debate whether God is the Creator or not? That would be as close to "Doctrine" as the post comes. That is also a tenet of every Christian that I have ever met or heard of. I see no area for Doctrinal Debate here. Ergo, it is not a Doctrinal post.

To address why dave c's devotionals are post in the main forum: It is because Pastor Gary said he could post them here. This is Gary's board, and his is the final say. We use this board at his discretion, if we have a problem with that . . . well the Internet is a big place, and I'm sure that we could find a site that we were more comfortable with.

To address scooter's posts: scooter is a big boy and quite capable of defending himself, I see no need for me to do so.

To address irnthnvesl's post responding to scooter: I do not for one minute believe that irthnvesl was referring to a donkey in his post. Therefore, that comment was not only unnecessary, it was in blatant disregard for the common values of the boards members.


TW

Tim Elston wrote:

scooter wrote:Grow up.

Same to you, "Bishop."

Response: If you think your use of a title like "Bishop" or Irthen's "Brother" somehow negates the fact that Irthen is an antagonist and has repeatedly gone on about posting doctrine on the main page you are mistaken.

Irthnvesl, in case you haven't noticed, don't expect to get a fair shake around here.