Danny,

May I suggest that you at least warn people before permanently DELETING what they have written. This will give them a chance to Cut/Paste into a new thread that is 'on track'. This would help to avoid what has happened with the new "Deathbed Conversions" thread... where people are trying to respond to what they remember being written.... We already have enough problems with misunderstandings.

Hopefully, you won't see fit to Delete the above suggestion... as you have when I placed it elsewhere....

-- Anonymous, January 04, 2002

Answers

Well what do you know....the "Three Amigoes" together on the gripe thread. What a surprise!!!

As per the previous policy....it sure was there. When I began more aggressively deleting posts....I explained very cleary what was going to start taking place....and I deleted quite a few. However...in the last two months....I had become....VERY....lax...and to be honest it shows. Threads get way off topic....and personal. So it's not like it's unprecendented.

Don't worry Robin....this tread will not be deleted.....at least by me. It really wasn't that hard to start another thread...was it??

And E. Lee....you said exactly what I expected you to say. You always know people's motives and reasons don't ya??

Have you posted your diatribe on the thief on the cross...on the "deathbed conversion" thread yet?? Because if you did....you would see it is still there.

And let's keep in mind gents...this is not your forum....never has been...never will be.

So if don't like the way things are run....and you have the desire to share your great knowledge with the world....do what Duane did....and start your own.

No one wants to squelch the truth....but quite a number of us have wearied of the personal nature of the discussions....and the little "cliques" of contentious people on the forum.

If we really wanted to squelch things....we could go to a password only forum....and lock you out completely.

So say what you got to say....say it on the appropriate thead.....say it in a civil manner without calling people, hyprocrites and the like......or....be deleted or locked out.

It really is that simple.

Oh...and save your work.

-- Anonymous, January 04, 2002

Those of us that know you Robin...knew you would.

Just keep in mind Robin....

Until you repent of that instrument....you are an erring and lost amigo!!!

-- Anonymous, January 04, 2002

Robin,

I made the same suggestion, and it got deleted also.

-- Anonymous, January 04, 2002

Robin:

I want to say AMEN AND AMEN to your words. I also made the same suggestion in the same thread and it also was deleted. These deletions appear to have more behind them than merely keeping a thread on track. They appear instead to have a "punishment" factor to them for speaking of something, even if it is in response to what another has said that may be off the subject. And, we do not know yet, but it appears in some cases that these deletions may be deliberately designed to prevent others from seeing facts that are contrary to the favored position of the one doing the deleting.

One thing is certain. These deletions are not being done according to any established or publicised policy that all posters have been made aware prior to posting their work. And there is not established criteria that a post must possess that would ensure that it would not be deleted. And, there is no procedure for the author of a particular work to retrive such a post prior to its being deleted. It seems to me that his post should be returned to him without having been edited before it is deleted so to ensure that his work is not lost. It would be very easy for the person doing the deleting to copy and paste the post into an email to the person with a brief statement indicating that it was being deleted and that he is welcome to start a new thread and post it there.

But, to have no criteria published by which a post shall be judged worthy of remaining in a thread is bad enough. But then to delete it without ensuring that the author will not lose his work is very wrong. Indeed the author may "save" his work but there are times when he may not save it, for example if he is working during his lunch hour at word and does not want to save it on his work computer. ANd there are other occssions and resons why it may not be saved. SO, for that reason, and the fact that there is no good reson to delete a persons work without either returning it to him via email or at least giving a period of warning and some time for him to at least copy and past it into anonther thread is just simply wrong and unjust.

Your Brother in CHrist,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, January 04, 2002

Danny,

Thanks for the "Three Amigoes" comment concerning Kevin, E. Lee, and myself! I didn't realize I was viewed that way... and I take it as quite a compliment!!

-- Anonymous, January 04, 2002

Brother Danny:

You have said:

“And E. Lee....you said exactly what I expected you to say. You always know people's motives and reasons don't ya??”

Not always, and I have never claimed to “always know” such. But in your case I am becoming very much convinced that I do know your motives. And they do not appear to be very good ones, Brother.

It is becoming difficult to trust you in these matters because of your inconsistencies. For as you have admitted you had been “lax” in your duties and then suddenly without any warning you decide you are going to be strict again. And you promised long ago that you were going to ensure that this thread was only for those involved in the restoration movement and you became lax in that duty as well.

Then you say:

“And let's keep in mind gents...this is not your forum....never has been...never will be.”

And this is not YOUR FORUM either Brother Danny. It is Duane’s forum and he has given you authority to delete post. But, who will delete your post when you are not “on track” in a given thread? Maybe Duane will be honest enough to do it. WE can only hope can’t we? You do not own the town you have simply been appointed, not elected, Deputy Sheriff, by the one who does own it. And you are full of your “power” somewhat like “Barney fife” and very little like “Andy Taylor” who was an honest, fair and ELECTED Sheriff. But be careful, Barney that you do not spark a “rebellion”!

So, you have been lax in your duties but you will not even give us any warning so that we can save our work before you delete it. And you will not even copy the post and send it back to us via email so that we can easily start a new thread with it if we must. And our request that yo give us warning was not an unreasonable request nor was it too hard for you to do. And that fact alone speaks volumes concerning your “motives” and attitude about this matter. But, what could we expect of a man who has been admittedly “lax” in his duties.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, January 04, 2002

Brother Danny you have said:

“If we really wanted to squelch things....we could go to a password only forum....and lock you out completely.”

It seems that you would like to do that, now wouldn’t you. And when you find a sufficient “excuse” you will do it, won’t you. And you will do that because it is clearly your desire to “squelch things” that you oppose isn’t it?

I say “go for it” if that is what you want. But do not be too surprised at how quite it gets after you do such a thing.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, January 04, 2002

Quick somebody call the Whambulance - all this whining! Danny kudos for you. You did the right thing and it was your perogitive. And yes, I remember that you did in fact warn me (us). I am reminded that this is not my forum thus it is not my right to get to post, rather it is my privilege and I am not guaranteed that my words are appropriate just because I think so. But there are some who think their words rate just under God's in worth. So they are so insulted that they lost their post. Be thankful Danny just did it now. If I had the power much more would be deleted.

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2002

Well, there is E. Lee with his "AMEN AMEN" number again.

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2002

This doesn't suprise me that I hear comments suchs as: "Three Amigoes", "cliques", "contentious people", etc... I am a Christian, and a Christian only. Not a "non", not "dense" etc., so I would appreciate it (if the shoe fits) if the name calling would stop.

It is also no surprise to me that Bill would make another snide comment such as "Whambulance" to make it appear that certain people are "whining" which is not the case at all. I have no problem with information being deleted, I believe it could have been done in a more civil way. And Bill, I don't think anyone was "insulted" that they lost their posts, I have only been on this forum for a couple of months, and have never needed to save my work before now. I have no problem with saving my work, however, if warning would have been given, then none of this would have happened now would it?

The truth of the matter is Danny deleted information on the other thread WITHOUT giving ANY warning before he deleted it, because he posted the following on the X-mas thread:

"This is not a "thief on the cross thread" which has nothing to do with Christmas...which was the title of this thread. If you want to carry on a "thief on the cross" diatribe....start your own thread so we can avoid it if we want to."

Now please tell me where in his statement he actually gave anyone a warning before deleting anything posted? I certainly don't see it, and it isn't there. Actually, posts were deleted first, and then he made his statement above.

All I would like is that if threads are now going to be kept on track, that if information is deleted, that it would be done in a consistent manner.

And finally Bill, I am certain that you would delete a lot of information if you had "the power" because as I see it, there have been a lot of posts directed towards you that you don't or didn't answer, because you don't have the answer to them now do you? I have noticed that frequently with your posts lately. Your response to someone you can't answer has been "I am through with you" and I am most certain that "if you had the power", you would delete any posts that were directed to you that you couldn't answer now wouldn't you?

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2002

Oh Dearest Kevin;

You told me didn't you? Do you feel better that you put me in my place? I stand by my comment that people on this board whine.

And unless you can show me, the only person I have refused to reply to has been E. Lee. For that matter he has refused to address issues that I have given to him. And as well, there is at least one issue that you have not answered for me either. It seems many of us dodge or even forget or possibly don't see a question tossed our way. I haven't whined about it cause I can accept that it happens. But since you brought it up.. As for E. Lee, I don't answer him unless I have a quick answer because I don't have the time to deal with him.

About what I would delete, I would delete every post that calls another writer or writing "pathetic" or something related. I would delete every put down if it is on a thread with a topic not related to put downs. And anything that does not relate to a thread gets the boot too. That is my view. So as I said I would delete much more and more often than Danny has, so "kwitcherbellyachin" as Ann Landers has said.

Finally, my "I am through with you" comments were directed at one man and you know quite clearly, he and I have more than scriptural differences. I have seen that he is quite versed in scripture in his head. But his writing has betrayed his heart, and I have not seen much in the way of grace or Christ in his replys. So to me it is not worth it. But I see you have grown to accept and to act much like this man. When you first posted you were full of grace and your words never reflected put downs. Fact is, mine didn't either. But one gets tired of the diatribes received and as you have done in this last post, you put in your snide remarks to match mine. It is all an escalation. So sad that we can denigrate to that.

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2002

Brother Bill,

You opened with: "Oh Dearest Kevin;"

Why can't it just be Brother Kevin?

You said: "You told me didn't you? Do you feel better that you put me in my place?"

I wonder how it is that "I put you in your place?" You made the comment that people were "whining" and I disagreed with you. How hard is that to understand?

Then you said: "I stand by my comment that people on this board whine."

Very well, but your comment should include "everyone" and not just certain people as it appeared that you were insinuating. Then you said: "And unless you can show me, the only person I have refused to reply to has been E. Lee."

Not true...the following is a comment that you made to me in the Handclapping... Part Two thread:

For Kevin I say,..."So to you I say, I am through." -- Bill Umstetter (gosloman@aol.com), December 09, 2001.

Funny isn't it, how you never bothered to answer my reply after you told me "So to you I say, I am through." I asked several questions of you in My December 09, 2001 reply to which you never responded.

Then you say: "For that matter he has refused to address issues that I have given to him."

It seems to me that E. Lee has responded to everything that you have asked him in your posts. He has addressed those issues, and you ignore them.

Then you continue with: "And as well, there is at least one issue that you have not answered for me either."

Okay, what is it? I am not from Missouri, but please show me? I would be glad to discuss the issue with you, as long as you agree to discuss the issue from the Bible, and not from your opinion.

Then you say: "It seems many of us dodge or even forget or possibly don't see a question tossed our way. I haven't whined about it cause I can accept that it happens. But since you brought it up.."

It is hard to miss something that is written for everyone to see. You have to be blind, or just don't want to answer the question to make that excuse.

You continued with: "As for E. Lee, I don't answer him unless I have a quick answer because I don't have the time to deal with him."

You say you don't have time to deal with him, but yet you continue to ask him questions and when he answers them you conveniently ignore them.

Then you said: "About what I would delete, I would delete every post that calls another writer or writing "pathetic" or something related. I would delete every put down if it is on a thread with a topic not related to put downs. And anything that does not relate to a thread gets the boot too. That is my view. So as I said I would delete much more and more often than Danny has, so "kwitcherbellyachin" as Ann Landers has said."

I am not "bellyachin" as you describe, I have said and continue to say that if posts are to be deleted, that they be consistent in their deletions in every thread.

Then you said: "Finally, my "I am through with you" comments were directed at one man and you know quite clearly, he and I have more than scriptural differences."

Another statement that is not true. See my comment above.

Then you continue with: "I have seen that he is quite versed in scripture in his head. But his writing has betrayed his heart, and I have not seen much in the way of grace or Christ in his replys. So to me it is not worth it."

Aaah, the truth finally comes out..."it is not worth it". My question to you is, if you don't want to answer his questions, why do you even bother to ask him questions in the first place if all you are going to do is ignore them?

Then you ended with: "But I see you have grown to accept and to act much like this man. When you first posted you were full of grace and your words never reflected put downs. Fact is, mine didn't either. But one gets tired of the diatribes received and as you have done in this last post, you put in your snide remarks to match mine. It is all an escalation. So sad that we can denigrate to that."

Now, you couldn't prove that to save your life. Please show me where I have "put down" anyone?

Funny isn't it, how you made a similar comment on the Handclapping... Part Two thread:

“It is my opinion that either Kevin is becoming a disciple of E. Lee in terms of this forum. Or, Kevin is E. Lee in hiding and now is coming out. My belief is built on the posts of kevin that are begining to read in form and style just like E. Lee's. This is eerie.” -- Bill Umstetter (gosloman@aol.com), December 09, 2001.

To which you were "called on the carpet" basically. Once again, I ask, where is your proof to this statement that you made in this thread: "But I see you have grown to accept and to act much like this man?"

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2002

Brother Kevin;

You said" Why can't it just be Brother Kevin?

So there you have it.

you also say: I wonder how it is that "I put you in your place?" You made the comment that people were "whining" and I disagreed with you. How hard is that to understand?

My point about whining is that when people don't get what they want they complain, self inclulded. We don't stop to think that the people who run this forum can do what they want sans our approval. Though I may disagree, I understand their point, so I don't complain. And to me complaining is usually whining. To wonder how you put me in my place, I think your writing is self evident. You wanted me to accept your thoughts and your position and that should be my place. That is what I understand from your writing in that post. If I misunderstand you, I apologize.

Then you said: "I stand by my comment that people on this board whine."

Very well, but your comment should include "everyone" and not just certain people as it appeared that you were insinuating."

I did not insinuate - I said "people on this board" That includes you and me and everyone. Take it at face value. Nothing hidden.

Then you state: Not true...the following is a comment that you made to me in the Handclapping... Part Two thread:

For Kevin I say,..."So to you I say, I am through." -- Bill Umstetter (gosloman@aol.com), December 09, 2001.

Ok Kevin another apology and explanation. I apologize for to you I did in fact as you have shown refused to answer your questions. It was from the issues that I stopped involving myself with as far as I can remember. I do not have time to search these archives to prove all I have or have not said. But suffice to my memory I was stopping my part of the discussion on the instrument issue. To me we were going no where and I wanted to make my time more productive.

Then you say: It seems to me that E. Lee has responded to everything that you have asked him in your posts. He has addressed those issues, and you ignore them.

I say yes there are many if not most all issues I have brought Mr. Saffold has addressed them. There were some issues such as apologies and harsh treatment of others he answered as he chose to not as I asked that is my point. He also has not answered to the issue of chopping people's statements to take things out of context. By chopping the whole sentence structure and meaning can be lost. AND NO, I am not going back to find the instance. You may call it lack of proof, I call it better things to do with my time.

You said: Okay, what is it? I am not from Missouri, but please show me?

Okay, here it is. If God does not give authority, even if it is an aid, how can we use it? An addition is an addition, even if it is just an aid. Therefore, how can you say it is ok, when God did not, give approval? Please do not restate your argument that aids are ok. In its purest logical sense, an aid IS an addition, so why would God excuse that because of our convenience?

Then you say: It is hard to miss something that is written for everyone to see. You have to be blind, or just don't want to answer the question to make that excuse.

I will give you that one. I don't believe in taking people to task generally when they don't answer a question. If they really wanted to they would have. But I contend, sometimes we think to reply and the question escapes us. But I'm sure you are right that most people who do not respond do not because they really do not want to.

You say: You say you don't have time to deal with him, but yet you continue to ask him questions and when he answers them you conveniently ignore them.

E. Lee and I have a large gap. If he would write directly and succinctly to the point, I would probably respond to him more often. But there are things that I put before him that he explains away or ignores. For instance, I asked him if he would have been better able to help brother Jewel if he had waited just a couple of weeks to let him grieve. He was told he hurt Bro. Jewel, and he thinks he did the righteous thing. I disagree. I think in knowing the bible, he is on track most of the time. But here is an example that he does not show grace or care for a hurting brother. It is akin to rubbing salt in the wound. Going further, I have used terms such as pile driver, spiritual bazooka, etc. He says he does not understand or I do not offer proof. The proof is in his many words. There is a difference between a sword and a cannon. A sword pierces exactly, a cannon blows a big hole. I have begged E. Lee to learn the art of succinctness. For so often his words are often repetitive and redundent in his posts. Say a thing once, is all that is needed.

You said: I am not "bellyachin" as you describe, I have said and continue to say that if posts are to be deleted, that they be consistent in their deletions in every thread.

I say that we don't have that right. This is a privilege to post. so accept what you get. I notice you did not disagree with what I said I would delete.

You said: Aaah, the truth finally comes out..."it is not worth it". My question to you is, if you don't want to answer his questions, why do you even bother to ask him questions in the first place if all you are going to do is ignore them?

I know I should not bait him. He pushes my button with his unkind spirit. I want to see what he is doing and hopefully think it through. But alas, I am an idiot to hope and think that might happen. But hope springs eternal.

Kevin, you look at your first posts and your posts now. they contain a stronger use of language. You take a tougher attitude. It leans more towards E. Lee's bite than your former way. I said I was doing the same thing. When it comes to the controversy we start here all our attitudes are often wanting. And you know what, to my memory only E. Lee has refused to accept his part in it.

As I said, it is sad. But I opened a thread about ministry, small groups. Why do we not share things that will build as opposed to arguing things that tear down.

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2002

Brother Bill,

Apology accepted. Now please don't think I am trying to not answer your question, (maybe I am to a point), but I tried to answer your (authority) question(s) in another thread, but I guess that wasn't the answer you wanted to hear, or it wasn't good enough. I tried my best, and it didn't convince you. Anyway, there is a debate coming up, and I would prefer to let the debate answer all of the questions regarding the authority issue if that is alright with you. So, consider this only a partial answer to your question.

You said: "I notice you did not disagree with what I said I would delete."

And you are absolutely correct. This was intentional on my part. Normally, if I agree with you, I will not comment on what you have written.

You say that my posts have contained stronger use of language. I say that it is not my intent at all. If this is the case, it is most likely because I have to answer 4 or 5 people at a time who ask me questions (which can and is difficult and time consuming) to where you if you ask a question, normally only have to answer to 1 or 2 people at a time.

Then you asked: "But I opened a thread about ministry, small groups. Why do we not share things that will build as opposed to arguing things that tear down."

Brother, if I had anything to add along that line, be sure that I would. I have little to no knowledge in that area, and it would not be wise for me to comment on something that I know nothing about.

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2002

Brother Philip:

You have said:

“Well, there is E. Lee with his "AMEN AMEN" number again.”

Do tell us, Brother, just what is wrong or sinful or contrary to the word of God to say “AMEN AND AMEN” when you agree with something that another Brother or sister in Christ might say? When we pray together in the assembly we all say “AMEN” at the end of our Prayers, do we not?

Let us just learn some things about this word which happens to be used in the scriptures.

“And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.” (Matt. 6:13).

“Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.” (Matt. 28:20).

“And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with [them], and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.” (Mark 16:20).

“And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.” (Luke 24:53).

“And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.” (John 21:25).

“Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?” (1 Cor. 14:16).

“If any man speak, [let him speak] as the oracles of God; if any man minister, [let him do it] as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.” (1 Peter 4:11).

“Blessed [be] the LORD God of Israel for ever and ever. And all the people said, Amen, and praised the LORD.” (1 Chr. 16:36).

“Also I shook my lap, and said, So God shake out every man from his house, and from his labour, that performeth not this promise, even thus be he shaken out, and emptied. And all the congregation said, Amen, and praised the LORD. And the people did according to this promise.” (Neh. 5:13)

“And Ezra blessed the LORD, the great God. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands: and they bowed their heads, and worshipped the LORD with [their] faces to the ground.” (Neh. 8:6).

“Blessed [be] the LORD God of Israel from everlasting, and to everlasting. Amen, and Amen.” (Ps. 41:13)

“And blessed [be] his glorious name for ever: and let the whole earth be filled [with] his glory; Amen, and Amen. (Ps. 72:19).

“Blessed [be] the LORD for evermore. Amen, and Amen.” (Ps. 89:52).

“Blessed [be] the LORD God of Israel from everlasting to everlasting: and let all the people say, Amen. Praise ye the LORD. (Ps. 106:48).

“Even the prophet Jeremiah said, Amen: the LORD do so: the LORD perform thy words which thou hast prophesied, to bring again the vessels of the LORD'S house, and all that is carried away captive, from Babylon into this place.” (Jer. 28:6).

And this is but a very small portion of the number of times we find the word Amen in the scriptures and it was normally used to indicate agreement or (So be it). Now, in speaking in this way which I agree with something is surely speaking with scriptural language for a scriptural purpose. So, why you do not like it I cannot imagine. It seems that you want to start another absurd and ridiculous wrangling over my choice of words as was seen in all of the stupid complaints about my accurate and correct use of the word “we”. And if this is your intent I can assure you that you will find me to be just as stubborn about saying “amen” as I was about my accurate use of the word “we”.

“At the end of a speech it means - so it is, so be it, may it be fulfilled. It was a custom, which passed over from the synagogues to the Christian assemblies, that when he who had read or discoursed, had offered up solemn prayer to God, the others responded Amen, and thus made the substance of what was uttered their own.”

“The word "amen" is a most remarkable word. It was transliterated directly from the Hebrew into the Greek of the New Testament, then into Latin and into English and many other languages, so that it is practically a universal word. It has been called the best known word in human speech. The word is directly related -- in fact, almost identical -- to the Hebrew word for "believe" (amam), or faithful. Thus, it came to mean "sure" or "truly", an expression of absolute trust and confidence.”

And I might add that it is used very often in the Old and New Testaments. Prophets, priest and Kings spoke it. The apostles of Christ and almost every inspired writer of the New Testament used it. It is a very good word for expressing confidence and agreement with what another Brother in Christ has said especially in relation to what is right, correct, true and good in the sight of God. It is without question a CHRISTIAN thing to do. And frankly we just cannot possibly understand your objection to its use. But you can rest assured that I will defend my absolute right to use it whenever I deem it appropriate to do so. But, one thing is certain, if brother Danny does not like it he will delete it. Perhaps you had best try to convince him that he should deny me the right to say amen and then, if he will help, you might be able to make it “go away” shortly after I use it. But I can always use it again can’t I?

It is the right thing to do and I will continue to do it whether anyone on this planet likes it or not.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, January 05, 2002

Amen!

-- Anonymous, January 06, 2002

Wow, this thread is like the Bickersons! The church in turmoil! As for deleting messages, I had that happen on a sports board and finally found out it came down to money. The guy who owned the board said his board would not survive without serious posts! The only reason most fans went there were to jab each other, so so much for his reason. This appears to be a power thing here and from the deleters posts, I think his authority should be revoked until his attitude changes for the better...what a sourpuss! ...my 2 cents worth. What

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

I had been reading the discussions at this site for quite a few months. Then I got fed up with the childish name calling, game playing, and meanness. So I quit coming here for a month or two. I missed learning from the knowledgable ones here. (that being most of you!) So I came back, and what do I find? The same old stuff. You can say you love each other all you want, but your words say something entirely different! I honestly think you are causing the Lord great sadness by the way you speak to one another. And remember guys, when you point a finger at someone, you have three fingers pointing back at you.

Why for the love of God, can't you all get rid of a little chunk of your egos, and teach eachother, and learn from eachother, and even edify one another. OK so your human, and that does mean that there will be disagreements. Why can't you disagree AND be kind??? I hope you learn to do this. You make me sick with your bickering. I know, "why don't I go away then?" Because as I said before, there is much to be learned here. Just try doing your teaching with a great big dose of LOVE!!!

-- Anonymous, January 15, 2002