Quick preliminary stuff Chris and we’ll get this behind us and if I have anything to say about still remain friends. I want to make as clear as possible that I take no joy in making you look bad and I will go out of my way not to. My goal is not to “win”. The only victory that really matters was won for me 2000 years ago. I cannot however allow this to just sit there and neither could you if the tables were turned.
Let’s start with this. You say I “searched out” your friends. Is that how you define following links that YOU posted. One from Vandapool (oh will we ever get to him), one on your Facebook page from Shea (who I actually do like AND respect, he doesn’t me though) and two from Shea on MY Facebook page. Which btw I ALWAYS welcome from you Chris. Always. The second one is still on my page(YOU deleted the other one). Where I told you how you were one of my favorite people. Do I deceive thus far?
For the record, I would never in one million years have posted a link to material critical of Catholicism on YOUR page and didn’t. Yet there you marched right onto mine posting yours. THAT was great LOL!!! I am not being sarcastic either. That is so wrong it simply DEMANDS respect and you got it. I said so. See. The people dear to me KNOW me and I know them. We study, pray, eat, laugh, cry, live and die together. That’s why I have no fear of what anybody could ever say about me on my Facebook page. You have it different which we discussed. You are meeting new people and that’s fair enough.
So is this what you mean by “searched out”. I followed some links YOU posted? Be careful how jump on this next part. I can hear you already. (please check your PM’s before responding)
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Quick preliminary stuff Chris and we’ll get this behind us and if I have anything to say about still remain friends. I want to make as clear as possible that I take no joy in making you look bad and I will go out of my way not to. My goal is not to “win”. The only victory that really matters was won for me 2000 years ago. I cannot however allow this to just sit there and neither could you if the tables were turned.
Let’s start with this. You say I “searched out” your friends. Is that how you define following links that YOU posted. One from Vandapool (oh will we ever get to him), one on your Facebook page from Shea (who I actually do like AND respect, he doesn’t me though) and two from Shea on MY Facebook page. Which btw I ALWAYS welcome from you Chris. Always. The second one is still on my page(YOU deleted the other one). Where I told you how you were one of my favorite people. Do I deceive thus far?
For the record, I would never in one million years have posted a link to material critical of Catholicism on YOUR page and didn’t. Yet there you marched right onto mine posting yours. THAT was great LOL!!! I am not being sarcastic either. That is so wrong it simply DEMANDS respect and you got it. I said so. See. The people dear to me KNOW me and I know them. We study, pray, eat, laugh, cry, live and die together. That’s why I have no fear of what anybody could ever say about me on my Facebook page. You have it different which we discussed. You are meeting new people and that’s fair enough.
So is this what you mean by “searched out”. I followed some links YOU posted? Be careful how jump on this next part. I can hear you already. (please check your PM’s before responding)[/quote]
I posted one Shea article and one article by another friend. You went on to other’s website and said your peace.
It was not critical to Calvinism, I would rather you post pages critical to Catholicism, I welcome all challenges against Catholicism, I stake my salvation on it. It was an apologetics article why the Catholic Church does not teach Universalism, which you have leveled. Which is not true.
Because you searched out my friends and harassed them by emailing and commenting on their personal and business websites and continued to disrespect me and the privilege I allowed to you in having contact with people who are important to me…after I asked you to stop insulting my friends, nevertheless you continued to contact and harass my friends so I deleted you from my Facebook since you could not handle not attacking my friends.[/quote]
Wow. [/quote]
Tirib,
I really don’t come through PWI very much but I was passing through today and thought you might give this a go and let us know how you make out:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:1) I posted one Shea article and one article by another friend. You went on to other’s website and said your peace.
2) It was not critical to Calvinism, I would rather you post pages critical to Catholicism, I welcome all challenges against Catholicism, I stake my salvation on it. It was an apologetics article why the Catholic Church does not teach Universalism, which you have leveled. Which is not true.[/quote]For this part of the discussion content is unimportant. We’ll get to that. We’re establishing “searching out” with implied obsessive stalking, or not. Which person’s site did I visit that was NOT a result of following links that YOU posted? presumably so that people would click on them. Which?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:1) I posted one Shea article and one article by another friend. You went on to other’s website and said your peace.
2) It was not critical to Calvinism, I would rather you post pages critical to Catholicism, I welcome all challenges against Catholicism, I stake my salvation on it. It was an apologetics article why the Catholic Church does not teach Universalism, which you have leveled. Which is not true.[/quote]For this part of the discussion content is unimportant. We’ll get to that. We’re establishing “searching out” with implied obsessive stalking, or not. Which person’s site did I visit that was NOT a result of following links that YOU posted? presumably so that people would click on them. Which?
[/quote]
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:1) I posted one Shea article and one article by another friend. You went on to other’s website and said your peace.
2) It was not critical to Calvinism, I would rather you post pages critical to Catholicism, I welcome all challenges against Catholicism, I stake my salvation on it. It was an apologetics article why the Catholic Church does not teach Universalism, which you have leveled. Which is not true.[/quote]For this part of the discussion content is unimportant. We’ll get to that. We’re establishing “searching out” with implied obsessive stalking, or not. Which person’s site did I visit that was NOT a result of following links that YOU posted? presumably so that people would click on them. Which?
[/quote]
I didn’t post their e-mails. [/quote]One thing at a time. So you are now saying that I wound up on their sites in the first place by following links that YOU posted with the intent that they be followed. Otherwise why?. Yes or no?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:1) I posted one Shea article and one article by another friend. You went on to other’s website and said your peace.
2) It was not critical to Calvinism, I would rather you post pages critical to Catholicism, I welcome all challenges against Catholicism, I stake my salvation on it. It was an apologetics article why the Catholic Church does not teach Universalism, which you have leveled. Which is not true.[/quote]For this part of the discussion content is unimportant. We’ll get to that. We’re establishing “searching out” with implied obsessive stalking, or not. Which person’s site did I visit that was NOT a result of following links that YOU posted? presumably so that people would click on them. Which?
[/quote]
I didn’t post their e-mails. [/quote]One thing at a time. So you are now saying that I wound up on their sites in the first place by following links that YOU posted with the intent that they be followed. Otherwise why?. Yes or no?
[/quote]
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:[quote]Tiribulus wrote:So you are now saying that I wound up on their sites in the first place by following links that YOU posted with the intent that they be followed. Otherwise why?. Yes or no?[/quote]Yes and discuss it with me.[/quote]Fine, I arrived at every one of these sites by following links that YOU posted. Is it not so that I was up front about trying not to mix it up on your page. That I wanted to be a good citizen there? Did I not make a point of saying out loud I would never want to do you wrong before the people who are dear to you? Did I not say that when you got uptight because I was teasing you about that pic with the suit n tie, saying all the pretty girls would be chasing you around?
I’ll go ahead and say yes so far because you will have to anyway. I didn’t see the message that said I should not discus what these guys were saying with them. Only you. Especially when I was intentionally trying to keep any controversy away from your friends on your Facebook page. (I did make a couple comments early on in response to YOU, but reeled myself in) I’m not supposed to use the public, registration free comment boxes that THEY provided on their pages? Along with “email me” links THEY provided there as well? I mean it did say, “leave comment” and “contact me”. So as to leave any potential problems away from YOUR Facebook page I commented there instead. I didn’t email ANYbody until they refused to post my remarks or respond at all. Am I not allowed to do this? Am I supposed to know that when they say “contact me”, an unspoken “except you Trib” message is implied there.
Now, I called ONE of your friends A coward. Do you wish to discuss him now? Your other friend who made the coward comment on his site failed to mention that it wasn’t him I was talking about. You’d know that if he’d posted the comment I left instead of erroneously reporting what it said. Fortunately I saved all the messages that these guys refused to post so there won’t be any quibbling.
Before we go there. Please explain why it was wrong for me to use the resources THEY provided. They talk real confident and cocky and tough and snarky about protestantism, especially Vandapool until somebody minimally capable shows up. I wasn’t supposed to use their sites? Complimentary comments only? That’s how it is with Catholics? Like I say Chris. You’ll never have that problem with me. I don’t have every answer, but come one come all. I don’t run from anybody. This is where we get touchy. That’s ok. Go ahead. (I must say that Mark Shea is a cut above in some ways. He seems to actually have a pair. we’ll get to that to)
For now, I hold my peace. And, I apologize. I apologize to the Nation and to Tirib.
I apologize for tearing down Tirib in such a way and continuing such a spectacle. It lacked prudence on my part and I should have addressed this situation differently or at a different time when anger was not in the air.
Let’s continue with Romans 2, and why you can’t interpret it…shall we?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
For now, I hold my peace. And, I apologize. I apologize to the Nation and to Tirib.
I apologize for tearing down Tirib in such a way and continuing such a spectacle. It lacked prudence on my part and I should have addressed this situation differently or at a different time when anger was not in the air.
Let’s continue with Romans 2, and why you can’t interpret it…shall we?[/quote]
Why are you apologizing for his use of links as an opening to harass your friends? “Read this,” doesn’t mean “go acting like a loon on their board.” If anything apologize to the people you exposed to him.
First post of his from the link on the first page…
“The gory mangling of scripture by Rome is well represented in this piece. Unbelievable. Really. Romans 2 properly understood teaches the exact opposite of the damnable deception put forth here on this page. As the great apostle goes on to say in chapter 3, the point of this oft butchered passage in chapter 2 is that, whether by the light of nature or command of covenant, ALL are equally damned without Christ. I will be demonstrating that to a Catholic(big C Christopher) friend of mine whereupon I will make that material available to you. Not that it’ll matter to you because regardless of how clearly accurate my exposition is, you will write it off as a “private interpretation”. However this dear Kim woman does not yet appear to be fully locked into your choke hold of heresy. Maybe she can be pulled ashore before she goes under for good.”
My, what a respectful guest!
Love how he drops your name…After first doing his usual schtick, lots of hyperbole (‘gory mangling’…‘damnable deception’…‘chokehold’…oooooh, ahhhh) and little else. He treats you, and talks to you and about you, paternalistically. "Oh, I respect you. You, despite believing and preaching the same as the “she-whore, Babylonian, goat-legged, devil-spawn Vatican.” Why? Because, you’re just the poor lost kiddo who must know he’s right, deep down. And you’re apologizing to him?
The (Big C Chris) thing is an ongoing sorta humorism that I use where I know he’ll be reading something. You are not helping him Sloth. I was about to let this go for now. Do Chris a favor and leave it at that. Seriously. You’ev been warned. The Catholic (big C Chris) use of terms such as “loon” is getting boring. Feel free to participate in the discussion I very much hope is finally coming soon.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote: So, you are not going to let this go? I think you should. >>>[/quote]What is this Chris? Who’s threatening who? Should I receive this as a retraction of your apology now that Sloth has succeeded (or so it appears) in stoking you back up when we were just about to put this away for the time being at least? When he is woefully, (though innocently) ignorant of what he’s sticking his nose into? [quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Sounds like you are giving a threat[/quote] If by “threat” you mean to say some sort of violence? You just have to be kidding me. =[ You really need to calm down =[ I told you the last time you went off on one these tantrums that you would have to beat me to death because I would never raise a finger against you. EVER.
I dunno? It is going to take quite a bit more than I thought for you to believe that I do not view you as an enemy to be conquered. What is your goal here Chris?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote: So, you are not going to let this go? I think you should. >>>[/quote]What is this Chris? Who’s threatening who? Should I receive this as a retraction of your apology now that Sloth has succeeded (or so it appears) in stoking you back up when we were just about to put this away for the time being at least? When he is woefully, (though innocently) ignorant of what he’s sticking his nose into? [quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Sounds like you are giving a threat[/quote] If by “threat” you mean to say some sort of violence? You just have to be kidding me. =[ You really need to calm down =[ I told you the last time you went off on one these tantrums that you would have to beat me to death because I would never raise a finger against you. EVER.
I dunno? It is going to take quite a bit more than I thought for you to believe that I do not view you as an enemy to be conquered. What is your goal here Chris?
[/quote]
Stop projecting your emotions on to me. You’re the one bringing Sloth into the middle of this. Talk about Romans 2 and stop picking fights. You said yourself you don’t want to do this.
One last thing and we’ll shelve this for now. You called me a liar right here:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Actually it was, you repeatedly called my friends cowards. Why you insist on lying about this I am not sure. >>>[/quote] I am weary of the repeated accusations against my character that have 100% of the time been either proven utterly false by me or ended in the retreat of my accuser. This is quick and easy and don’t try n tell me I should leave this one go. I KNOW you wouldn’t. Where did I lie? Demonstrate that I did and I will repent in front of everybody. You know I will. If not it is incumbent upon you to recant. If in fact a man you have accused of lying is in fact not guilty as charged do you not believe our God would have that rectified. All liars have their part in the lake of fire after all.
I can hardly believe we have to do this Chris. If I ever accuse somebody of lying you can bet your last buck I have evidence at the ready before the accusation goes public.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
One last thing and we’ll shelve this for now. You called me a liar right here:
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Actually it was, you repeatedly called my friends cowards. Why you insist on lying about this I am not sure. >>>[/quote] I am weary of the repeated accusations against my character that have 100% of the time been either proven utterly false by me or ended in the retreat of my accuser. This is quick and easy and don’t try n tell me I should leave this one go. I KNOW you wouldn’t. Where did I lie? Demonstrate that I did and I will repent in front of everybody. You know I will. If not it is incumbent upon you to recant. If in fact a man you have accused of lying is in fact not guilty as charged do you not believe our God would have that rectified. All liars have their part in the lake of fire after all.
I can hardly believe we have to do this Chris. If I ever accuse somebody of lying you can bet your last buck I have evidence at the ready before the accusation goes public.
[/quote]
You’re still picking a fight? Let me get this right, you are denying you called my friends cowards?
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< You’re still picking a fight? Let me get this right, you are denying you called my friends cowards? [/quote]Chris you started this whole thing, two posts in a row on the last page. I was getting ready to go on to Romans 2 which became the topic of discussion because of the article YOU posted from http://www.almostnotcatholic.com . YOU called ME a liar. Remember
I called Vandapool a coward which he is and no I did not nor do I deny. I’m denying that I lied about that or anything else and am still waiting for you to show where I did. He is a lying cowardly weakling who slung a bunch of mud at me and then disabled my ability to reply. HE started with ME when I simply asked a question with barely a whiff of sarcasm. That page is still there. I was willing to let all this go and just address your charge against me of lying. Others have tried that Chris. They failed too. I’ll tell you the same thing I told them. I DO NOT LIE. Simple. Then nobody can catch me in one. Your turn. Where is my lie? OR, recant the charge. That’s not fair?