From here:
Dr. Michael Bauman said:
At least the Inquisitors let the accused speak for himself before condemning him. Not here.
It should almost go without saying, but this is a ridiculous statement.
-As if James White is somehow preventing Dr. Beckwith from speaking.
-As if James White is somehow threatening Dr. Beckwith with physical harm, imprisonment, or death!
-As if James White is pressing a self-professed member of his own religion in order to elicit a confession. I don't think Dr. Beckwith would call himself a Reformed Babdist. It's just something my gut tells me...
Dr. White doesn't need me to defend him, but let's all take this as a learning experience.
If you throw around allusions or comparisons to such extreme cases as the Inquisition, the Crusades, or the 3rd Reich, or when you throw around labels such as "misogynist", "racist", or "Bible-thumping fundy" (as our liberal friends are so fond of doing), you cheapen almost beyond measure the TRUE explanatory meaning and justifiable shock value of those things. Do it too much, and the Holocaust means nothing to anyone anymore. Prejudging someone as inferior and treating them like garbage b/c of different skin color can't be properly called out. And here we see the horror of a non-biblical model for inducing forced apostasy being brought to bear on a completely unanalogous situation. I smell something... smells like a conscience... on a frying pan...
Posts
23 comments:
"-As if James White is somehow preventing Dr. Beckwith from speaking.
-As if James White is somehow threatening Dr. Beckwith with physical harm, imprisonment, or death!
-As if James White is pressing a self-professed member of his own religion in order to elicit a confession. "
I don't read any of that in his statement. All he's saying is that Dr. Beckwith should be considered the authority on what Dr. Beckwith believes, not Mr. White.
Makes sense to me.
"As if James White is somehow preventing Dr. Beckwith from speaking."
Maybe White been teaching that Beckwith was born with a totally inability to speak.
Two great examples of what I mean. Thank you.
Vomit, vomit, vomit. What a classy joint you run here, Dave. James Swan is right, you are a crude, foul-mou... ohhh. ooops.
sorry.
I truly enjoyed this throwaway post you vomited up for us to read. Very classy! will you be belching the next one or farting it?
You're a real class act, son.
The vulgarity police are asleep today. Do you think that Rhology paid them off, or did he merely threaten to "vomit" their way?
I'm sure it has nothing to do with blatant hypocracy or the desire to make an issue to attack a person rather than address his thoughts, now would it? surely, the use of the word "vomit" by Rhology must be more important than the message he had in his post...
Naw.
Let it go Alan. Just let it go.
At least the Inquisitors let the accused speak for himself before condemning him. Not here.
This statement is at best putrid, at worst defiling.
As Dr. White has already pointed out, Dr. Beckwith has had plenty of "air time" to express his views. This makes Dr. Bauman's statement all the more ridiculous. If this were not enough, diving into the Tiber in order to swim back to a false Gospel says it all. Actions speak louder than words. My reaction was the same as yours . . .
"As if James White is somehow preventing Dr. Beckwith from speaking."
...My reaction was the same as yours . . .
"As if James White is somehow preventing Dr. Beckwith from speaking."
And my reaction is not the same as yours, as it is obvious that is not what he's saying, but rather that Dr. Beckwith's own testimony about what he himself believes should be take over what Mr. Whit's testimony is about what Dr. Beckwith believes. The inquisitors, as horrible as they were, using whatever means they did to elicit "confessions" etc, were still obligated to judge their victims based on their victims' own testimony. Not so for Mr. White who not only condemns Dr. Beckwith, he does so based on White's statement of Beckwith's beliefs, not Beckwith's.
I take it as fair and accurate.
The vulgarity police are STILL asleep! Rhology must have a special "vomit" deal. Oh, it's enough to wonder how he gets away with all the same puke every day? It's a regular up-chuck-wagon here.
Let's see, if a "donkey" speaks the prophet should hold his ears, since the animal is also known by a "vulgar" word that is "innapropriate for Christians" (As Crrie wrote on DA's blog.). Would it be ok if instead of speaking, it "vomited" the message?
What a class act this blog is. (Good thing I didn't write the anglicized word for the asinine herbivore. That would degrade this blog to the same level as DA's, right?)
I love this.
Seriously, y'all, keep making absurd complaints about the word "vomiting". The Complaints Department is keeping tabs. My pink slip is on its way downstairs.
"Seriously, y'all, keep making absurd complaints about the word "vomiting""
vomit vomit vomit. How crude! How inappropriate for a Christian! How so like DA's blog this place has become. Oh the vulgarity!
Absurd? No kidding. You catch on quickly, there Rhology: quite a fast study--yup.
And my reaction is not the same as yours, as it is obvious that is not what he's saying, but rather that Dr. Beckwith's own testimony about what he himself believes should be take over what Mr. Whit's testimony is about what Dr. Beckwith believes.
Like I said, Beckwith has had plenty of time to speak and still does. More importantly, Mr. Anonymous, is the fact that Dr. Beckwith's return to Rome speak louder than his words ever could. I understood what was communicated just fine, but thanks for your concern anyway.
" I understood what was communicated just fine, but thanks for your concern anyway."
In the first regard, then why complain? In the econd, you're mistaken. I'm not concerned.
When will Rhology fart us another post? I smell a winner!
I'd like to challenge you folks to demonstrate what is edifying in all of this nonsense. I'm a sinner, just as are all of you. But let's not wallow in it, shall we? If your goal is to make Beggar's All unpalatable for the rest of us who used to enjoy reading the posts and comments (from all sides) here, then congratulations.
"If your goal is to make Beggar's All unpalatable for the rest of us who used to enjoy reading the posts and comments (from all sides) here, then congratulations."
So long as James, Carrie and others continually attack anyone or anything not because of their actual teaching, but because of some nonsense they puff up into a controversy, it is dung. The absurd dismissal of someone because he used another word for "donkey" in reference to a donkey in the same thread where the guy was talking about accepting truth that comes from God no matter who or what the messenger is shows it. Does James correct the person who then jumped all over the guy? No. But does he slap at the guy who appealed for kindness? Yup. It looks like kindness is not something James values, but artificially pure language is.
Pilgrimsabour, if fart talk is unpalatable, why do you tolerate Rhology's "vomit" talk? What is edifying about it? What builds up the body in this blog's continual condemnation of anyone who professes Chrit in a way the primary contributers judge inadequate?
What does truth matter the these people? The only reason James and company are tolerating the absurdly crude stuff I've posted, is that they would then have to admit that thier "rules" for what is always appropriate for Christians (as Carrie said on DA's blog) are in reality something they made up just to use as a false scruple to bash over someone else's head, since Rholly's "vomit" gets a pass. But if it's crudity in describing Catholics, no shame can exist. Luther's designs of woodcuts of porographic vileness depicting the biths of Clergy as being excreted from womens anuses are just fine. But say "donkey" in the wrong way?
If that sort of crass, false "look at my holy stance" posing is your idea of writing you enjoy reading, your sense of edification is off. I'll take an honest bilogical function over dishonest false scruples any day.
is that they would then have to admit that thier "rules" for what is always appropriate for Christians (as Carrie said on DA's blog) are in reality something they made up just to use as a false scruple to bash over someone else's head,
Careful anonymous, your ignorance and blind devotion to DA is showing.
Your comments here are tiring and unwanted. If you can place aside your bitterness for a minute and note the facts at least regarding me - DA posted about vulgarity and I posted my own opinion on the subject. He disagreed with my opinion and that is fine - I only tried to make him think through the issue rather than react out of emotion (if that is what happened).
That said, your inability to move on from such an interaction is sad, but move on you must do. I for one am tired of you (lumping you in with all anonymous comments since I can't know who is who) bringing this blog down and I can see that the commenters that I value are also tired of you.
So I am asking you to leave and not come back until you can behave like an adult. It would be a shame if this blog had to move to comment moderation (which slows down discussion greatly) b/c one or two people can't control their tongues and show some level of maturity.
And since I like to encourage people to do what is right, I will add that your behavior here with clear refernces to your loyalty to DA only continue to bring down other opinion's of DA as he could be seen as 1) indirectly inspiring this type of behavior and 2) attracting this type of commenters/fans.
Do yourself, DA, and everyone here a favor and move on.
Thanks.
"Your comments here are tiring and unwanted. If you can place aside your bitterness for a minute and note the facts at least regarding me."
Translation: I can't admit I am wrong about anything, so I'll just whine, "you are wrong about me." Gotcha. By the way, you missed the irony in your comment about moderation. If there is anything that this blog thrives on, it's lack of moderation.
"Careful anonymous, your ignorance and blind devotion to DA is showing."
LOL!
Careful Carrie: Your skirts are too thin. Everyone can still see Mr. Swan hiding behind them.
Geez, people, that's quite enough.
I'm closing the comments here.
Post a Comment