Re: To refute Kelly decisively over Essenic Origin of the Christian Religion
- From: ijdavis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Ian Davis)
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:49:58 +0000 (UTC)
In article <64d9cc35-4a42-4af7-a05d-bf29e3d7aec3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
David <pchristainsen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 12, 11:25 pm, "<316>" <316k...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 12, 3:37 pm, David <pchristain...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
and I don't give a fig about
Yeah, sure you don't.
I want you to be convinced FOR YOURSELF
and BY YOURSELF.
In that you are no different from the evangelists who also want to impose
their views on others. Hardly the conduct of a "future" Quaker. I don't
really understand evangelicals. Superficially, they want to convince
others of what they believe because they claim that this is what God
wants them to do, and they imagine they'll be awarded brownie points if
they succeed. But they err in thinking God wants people to change
others. The more they believe this the less they see that God seeks
change in the self. Before you try fixing others David, you should
really first fix yourself. If good actions lead to good ends, might I not
reasonably conclude that your actions have been mistake after mistake
after mistake. And if you are not capable of making good choices in how
you act, how then are you to convince others that your opinions have
any merit whatsover. If you would lead others, lead by example, not by
being a bore.
1. to weary by dullness, tedious repetition, unwelcome attentions, etc.
The long speech bored me.
2. a dull, tiresome, or uncongenial person.
3. a cause of ennui or petty annoyance: repetitious tasks that are a bore to do.
- Prev by Date: Notes on Transformation
- Next by Date: Who is David Christainsen, really?
- Previous by thread: Re: To refute Kelly decisively over Essenic Origin of the Christian Religion
- Next by thread: Re: To refute Kelly decisively over Essenic Origin of the Christian Religion