Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hercule:
Most Americans generalize because that is as specific as they can get. Only the intellectuals--mainly on the left--make distinctions and nuancees and so forth. For this they are called less American or "un-American." So I think a conservative American intellectual would be one who writes books full of generalizations.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scot:
Canada, however, will have to collectively stand before God and answer for Tom Green.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mousethief:
Isn't this thread dead yet?

Reader Alexis

---

It's like Simon - a mutant undead zombie, that JUST WON'T DIE!!!!!!!

Viki

--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by duchess:
the Mid and others...let me clarify something.

LOOK...you can make alll theeee generalizations you want about what I eat for breakfast...what music I listen to...etc...I don't give a flying rat's you know what. [I eat bagels with cream cheese most of the time by the way..sometimes wheat bagels with fat free chream cheese and sometimes some fruit like a banana)...You can even
say I look like I laid an egg in my picture I posted (which somebody did...How did you know?)

What I mind though is:
You reading some free-basing book of "America is bad-bad...they are blah-blah" and then come in here and tell us stuff you read from a crack-smoker who has no clue about things in our politics! When you can't even get our govt right...or how our laws work (hint: read up on electrol voting...read up on the Bill of Rights...read up on the 3 branches of govt). If you believe Bill Clinton walks on Water and George Bush sucks eggs...at least have the decency to read up a whole heck of a lot before you make up your minds. Ignorant opinions from outsiders about our politics really bite dead farm animals with bacteria...please at least read up on BOTH SIDES...don't be lazy...read up....PLUUUUEEEZE.

Thank you.

GOD BLESS GEOGRGE W. BUSH and AMERICA,

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rowen:
Rook, psychologically speaking, when you hate others, it is actually something in yourself that is bothering you a heck of a lot..... Feel free to tell us what it is IN YOU that bugs you like this.... Not because we are nosy and curious, but for the purposes of prayer, naturally...

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by duchess:
Nunc, I will get out of my humor mode and extend an olive branch to you. It is not my intent to flame you back. I would like to have some peace.

---

quote:

---

I know this is hell and personal attacks are permissable and all that but I still request we make peace here. I honestly was trying to defuse the gun I saw fired at me, make the bullets you fired at me fall to the ground finally cause maybe you would finally laughed (it worked with mousethief before..I know he remembers).

---

quote:

---

I know others in here enjoy going at each others throats and all that...and I enjoy a taunt just like anyone else

---

quote:

---

And of course we all know that Baptists are on the Other Side of the ecclesial pale.

---

quote:

---

And of course we all know that Baptists are well and truly on the Other Side of the ecclesial fence.

---

quote:

---

but this is getting a bit over the top for me. It seems you are truly angry at me and making a habit of just ripping at me personally rather than post something in the spirit of fun or just attack the issue I present.

---

quote:

---

Ruth and I already made peade...I apologized to her and we have exchanged e-mails (regarding the whole inerrantist/errantist thing in Headship). We don't have to agree to have some peace.

---

quote:

---

Will you accept an olive branch of peace from me, yes or no? It does not mean you have to agree with me nor does it mean that you must like me or "my kind". It just means maybe you and I can reach some kind of understanding...I do not wish to incite honsetly any hurtful or angry feeings that seem to be coming from you to me and will stop responding to any posts from you if that is the only thing I can do to make some peace occur between me and you. I am still a newbie in here and will make my lame mistakes, just like anybody else.

---

This is slightly condescending duchess. Do you understand why I was so upset? It really sounds from the tone of this paragraph (and indeed from the tone of most of your post) that you think this disagreement with me is an inconvenience and rather a bother. That to me doesn't sound like you understand why some of us, or I, might be upset by the way in which you have said certain things.

Unless we attempt to understand each other we are going to come into conflict again.

Actually, my best friend is a dyed in the wool Calvinist, and an inerrantist... So I do like some of "your kind"... And one of the things converstation on the Ship has taught me is tolerance, more than tolerance, respect and sometimes love for many of those of differing opinions which formerly I reviled. I hope that this will also be true for you.

Let me give you a bit of the background from which I am coming.

I am Anglo-Catholic, theologically, liturgically, spiritually. The process by which I became this has been a long one, though I am not going to recount the whole thing here.

Duchess, my Dad is a hyperCalvinist who used to be much more extreme than he is now. I grew up memorising the Westminster Shorter Catechism and able to engage in pigheaded theological debates as a ten year old... I wish we had had more of the gospel than the law, but anyway, I think my parents were doing their best.

In consequence, after I was converted (as an Anglican at the age of 18), it took years to overcome the tenseness and hackle-rising reaction whenever certain phrases were used. The "Law-Word of God" is one such phrase I still can't stand! And there are many like it. I have worked hard in the last year on overcoming this (having a Calvinist best friend who thinks you are on a shaky road helps), and have sorted through many of the issues I had with my Dad. We understand each other a lot better now, though our beliefs are at rightangles to each other in some things.

I mention this, because as I alluded to earlier, we both stand in intellectual/spiritual postitions which are in a way reactive against our fathers': yours is an errantist, mine is a Calvinist inerrantist; you are a ?Calvinist inerrantist, I am a catholic liberal (unsure as yet about the inerrancy thing, though I have heard it expounded as not incompatible with a liberal catholic view of Scripture). I really believe that those of us like you and me who do occupy such positions have to be doubly careful to understand other peoples' beliefs and be courteous and respectful of them.

You offer an olive branch. If you understand what I have said, I should hope I can accept and we can at least have peace...

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by duchess:
Salvation is through the Catholic church to the RCC (pointing to Jesus Christ)...for evangelical Protestants salvation is through the bible (pointing to Jesus Christ).

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by duchess:
for evangelical Protestants salvation is through the bible (pointing to Jesus Christ).

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ham'n'Eggs:

quote:

---

Originally posted by duchess:
for evangelical Protestants salvation is through the bible (pointing to Jesus Christ).

---

For a minority that perform idolatory centred on the Bible, possibly.

For the rest of us, that is a pretty damn offensive thing to say.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stoo:
Ham'n'Eggs & the tombster are quite correct.

---

I hear tomb is needing to sharpen his claws. How nice of you to provide a scratchpad

Viki

--------------------
“Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar.”

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ham'n'Eggs:
If Duchess were to attempt to discuss matters in Purgatory instead of treating Hell as if it were some kinda chill-out bar where she can open her mouth and let it all hang out (and blabber all over threads that are not appropriate for her to be on), she may find it to her benefit.

If she keeps dumping her crock in here, she will get roasted. Not a threat. Just a statistical probability.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nightlamp:
You never know Ham'n'Eggs Scott might learn to read some time before posting, but I wouldn't put much money on it.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by duchess:
Nunc,

Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

---

And thanks for the clarity of yours.

quote:

---

I did feel like you were picking on me personally rather than issues I put forth (the comments like "lack of integrity" and "we don't care what you have for breakfast"...and "don't push your views on me" (I paraphrased from memory but they are all in this thread). I never once put you down albeit I did have stabs at Austrailian breakfast's and the way Austrailia was formed.

---

Yes I used the term lack of integrity and it was a personal remark, but not a generalised comment; I was commenting on how you appeared to generalise about what Australians eat for breakfast (although really, be honest, you've never been here, you wouldn't know) - and then complaining that we had generalised about what you eat for breakfast. This to me shows a lack of integrity - take it or leave it - if you complain about people generalising about you, don't generalise about them (now, where did I read that, in the Sermon on the Mount?). It had nothing to do with whether or not you are a Calvinist, and anyway, if I had made a blanket statement about Calvinists lacking integrity I would have been roasted, as several shipmates have promised you above. And, if I feel someone is treading on me I believe I have the space to be able to say, "By all means hold your views, but don't force them on me." I would accord you the same right if I were to start bashing on about how those who don't believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament are Hell-bound (not that I believe this).

quote:

---

I do see good natured taunts (ribbing) going back and forth on SoF all the time. I meant my posts in that manner, not to literally put any country down or group of people, even if it came off that way.

---

quote:

---

When you tell me I am "lacking in integrity" to me that is pretty cold. It seemed like you just wanted to keep putting me down and yes, there was no other way I could see it but as personal since you didn't preface it like "you Calvinists lack integrity since you all...blah lbah" or "you inerrantists all lack integrity since you all ..." I do consider myself an honest person, albeit fallen person and I felt like I was going to finally start flaming you back with "takes one to know one" type comments. That is not my intent though (to be in a flame war), so I bit my tongue and reframed.

---

quote:

---

I am sorry about my comment re: the Penal Colony. I did not mean in any shape or form to put down Austrailia. My church has planted a church there in Brisbane and someday I plan on going there to visit. I do not look down on Oz and did not mean any disrespect.

---

That's great. Although I worry about your church doing a plant here. We are not all barbarian cannibals you know, and the churches here are not remiss in preaching and living the gospel. It would be lovely to have you out here - and we shall organise a shipmeet.

quote:

---

I guess you ironically have a dad with similar views as me. My dad is a bit agnositic, as you guessed, but he gives sermons (!) at the church he goes to (they let people get up there and have a go at that sort of thing). I have even critqued his first sermon at that church. I do know your views are much more different from my dad(for one, you are a Catholic, I am assuming a RCC one, not Orthodox).

---

Don't assume too much. Looks like you have a bit of learning to do!!!

I am an Anglo-Catholic. An Anglican who has a catholic understanding of things. But yes, your dad and I don't share many common views... Although you say he goes to church? Id be interested which one...

quote:

---

Anyway, RCC holds the bible to be true, but supplements it with church doctrine (that is my understanding). (RCC believes Jesus did actually rise from the dead...etc). They also count the 2nd deutrocanonical books (which Protestants do not) in the bible (Macabees...Judith...) and base some church doctrine on. Salvation is through the Catholic church to the RCC (pointing to Jesus Christ)...for evangelical Protestants salvation is through the bible (pointing to Jesus Christ).

---

quote:

---

That is why I get very upset when people don't take the bible literally, since to me, it is Salvation (not to start a debate here). I see it disrepectful to the Lord to not believe the bible really happened (again, not to start a debate, just explaining why I said what I said). [Jonah story omitted...]

Anyway, this story reminds me that no matter how I feel (and I felt pretty upset by your posts), I don't want to be a Jonah sitting out by a tree in 110 degree heat...and the tree gets eaten by a worm...and I won't get over myself enough to try to extend even a smidgen of grace to people compared to the bucket loads of grace God extended to me.

---

quote:

---

Thanks for taking the olive branch. In the future I will try to be more considerate.

---

Thanks for this. I am glad. However, I think you and I and a number of others are going to come into quite a bit of conflict of views and perspectives, partly through what seems to be a different use of language, partly through continental/cultural differences, and partly because we are failing to understand each other's way of expressing things.

Let's call a truce, as Ruth says. But let's not pretend it is peace - because it patently cannot be until we understand each other more. And that means both an effort on my part to put aside the hackles that rise at the thought of fundamentalist evangelical sola scriptura-ist protestantism, and an effort on your part not to offend (please be very careful with this - I know you were not being deliberately offensive above, but then this is a case in point, where languge usage, however innocent, confuses meaning), to learn and understand where others are coming from, and - never to assume!

Posted                       

quote:

---

<snip!> Witness for example the exchange above - your last post to do with Scot's name being incorrectly spelt. There is an obvious division here where you perceive Scot to be "on your side" and so are sticking up for something he said. I feel the whole exchange was rather dubious/borderline, especially given the obvious "us" versus "them" mentality you and Scot have got happening.

Humour is a good thing. We must be careful how we use it.

---

quote:

---

I have not attacked you, but rather pointed out an inconsistency (or several) in your approach, and inconsistency, yes, that is not entirely lacking in my own conduct at times. As you say, we are bruised reeds...

---

quote:

---

That's great. Although I worry about your church doing a plant here. We are not all barbarian cannibals you know, and the churches here are not remiss in preaching and living the gospel. It would be lovely to have you out here - and we shall organise a shipmeet.

---

Lord have mercy...it was not a slight on Australia to plant a church...it was an act of love. Not too many reformed churches in at least that area of Oz so some felt called to plant one. Thanks for the offer of meeting me at a shipmeet. Hopefully someday I will get out there, God willing and the well don't rise.

quote:

---

I am an Anglo-Catholic. An Anglican who has a catholic understanding of things. But yes, your dad and I don't share many common views... Although you say he goes to church? Id be interested which one...

---

quote:

---

Anglicans hold a triad as very important: <snip! portion explaining triangle>We are saved by Grace: and this grace comes to us in faith, in the sacraments, in tradition, in the bible, and all gifts we are given.

---

quote:

---

No catholic believes him/herself to be saved through the church - although they will say that grace comes through the church especially in the sacraments, and that to not be in the church availing oneself of those graces(sacraments) is folly. However, I think you will find all Christians should agree that we are saved through Christ, the Way the Truth and the Life.

---

quote:

---

Sola Scriptura is inaccurate for a number of reasons - I will not go into them here as there are several threads that have treated the topic ad nauseam.

---

quote:

---

One reason it is inaccurate is that at some point in reading it someone has to interpret it, whether the individual reading it at home, or the minister/pastor-person up the front expounding it. When someone does interpret Scripture it is usual to turn to a commentary (especially in difficult passages) or some other guide. (Baaaad memories of Sunday afternoon bible studies where my dad would read a passage and then get out Calvin and Rushdoony and Matthew Henry.) In other words, one refers to other sources or "authorities" to get a better picture of what the words say and mean.

---

quote:

---

Catholics simply take this further and say that the church interprets Scripture; it was the church that decided at the ecumenical councils which books were canonical and which were not... The book Protestants uphold was not decided upon until around the 700s (IIRC). It was not dropped down from heaven into the lap of Luther or anyone else. There were several books that almost got rejected (James being one) and several books that almost qualify as canonical but which for some reason were omitted - several letters from different apostles and disciples of the apostles.

---

quote:

---

God obviously had enough confidence in the church/had obviously sent his Spirit upon it so that it might make the right decisions about what was to become the bundle of books that go by the reputation of having been "breathed" by God. I do not believe the Spirit has left the church, and therefore it has Christ's own authorisation to declare things "bound"/"unbound" on earth. It also means that we are subject to that Spirit of God; we are not subject to the black and white print on the pages of one's tatty little NIV(had mine for about 17 years... and boy is it tattered!).

---

quote:

---

As an Anglican I see the deuterocanonical books as "helpful for instruction" and the Anglican lectionary includes readings from them.

---

quote:

---

Forgive me, but I am a tad confused. Do you see me as someone who needs to be extended grace - to be saved? (Every minute of every day, to be sure...) But I have to say I find it offensive that you perceive that catholics (or those who are not Sola Scriptura-ists) need to be saved as though they aren't (although it would be consistent with a calvinist system of belief).

---

quote:

---

However, I am glad you are trying to show grace. Though I am again a bit worried, because this is the second time you have told us how restrained you have been, how good you have been not to bite my head off. I don't understand what you are trying to do, but it comes across to me as slightly manipulative: "Look how good I have been, how I have been trying to exemplify Christ; and what are you doing but poking me and flaming me?"
Sorry, but I don't find this convincing.

---

quote:

---

Thanks for this. I am glad. However, I think you and I and a number of others are going to come into quite a bit of conflict of views and perspectives, partly through what seems to be a different use of language, partly through continental/cultural differences, and partly because we are failing to understand each other's way of expressing things.

---

quote:

---

Let's call a truce, as Ruth says. But let's not pretend it is peace - because it patently cannot be until we understand each other more. And that means both an effort on my part to put aside the hackles that rise at the thought of fundamentalist evangelical sola scriptura-ist protestantism, and an effort on your part not to offend (please be very careful with this - I know you were not being deliberately offensive above, but then this is a case in point, where languge usage, however innocent, confuses meaning), to learn and understand where others are coming from, and - never to assume!

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scot:
...In short, if you have a legitimate and specific beef with me, then let's hear it. Otherwise, piss off.

---