"go, sell all that you have and give to the poor..."

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I've seen nothing that would lead me to believe Richard Pervert is the Einstein of Biblical scholarship.

He was a leading scholar on particular NT texts and is remembered as such.

You appear to consider that a person's achievements in their respective field should be dismissed because of their personal life or behaviours. That is a ludicrous position to adopt, in my opinion.

I have ignored the rest of your post because you appear unable to offer comment without resorting to puerility.

If you wish to seriously address the topic in the manner of a rational grown-up and not in the guise of a thirteen year-old in the school yard I recommend you change your tone.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It is a difference between the secular world and the religious one.

Does that exclude Ted Haggard, Jerry Falwell Jnr, Jim Bakker, and Jimmy Swaggart [just to name a few]?

[Mountain Man]

I have ignored the rest of your post because [that's what I do when I don't have a good counterargument].

Edited for accuracy.

[oxmixmudd]

Why should it? Are you going to denounce the importance and value of Einstein's work because he was loathsome husband and father?

Newton was also an extremely unpleasant man being, on occasion, both cruelly vindictive and spiteful. Perhaps you should reject Newtonian physics as well!

The Science of physics and a scientist's personal morality (excepting a few areas like personal integrity wrt the scientific work itself or the willingness to devolop horrible weapons ) are orthogonal. Personal morality and Christian faith simply are not, they are fully interconnected.

[rogue06]

Here's another sample of her variations....from a day or so ago.

And there was a new variation "I have ignored the rest of your post" -- but she sure gets miffed when someone won't keep answering her incessant questions that are typically designed to distract and derail the thread sending it down rabbit holes arguing about irrelevant minutia.

[oxmixmudd]

And there was a new variation "I have ignored the rest of your post" -- but she sure gets miffed when someone won't keep answering her incessant questions that are typically designed to distract and derail the thread sending it down rabbit holes arguing about irrelevant minutia.

This sort of ganging up on a person and taking derogatory and denigrating potshots about them at length as if they are not there is pubescent and potentially cruel.

[CivilDiscourse]

And there was a new variation "I have ignored the rest of your post" -- but she sure gets miffed when someone won't keep answering her incessant questions that are typically designed to distract and derail the thread sending it down rabbit holes arguing about irrelevant minutia.

There's a habit of chopping up a single connected paragraph into chuncks, and then acting like they are in isolation.

My favorite one so far, is I've had her chop up and remove a post, only to ask a question that was actually answered in the parts of the post she cut out.

[rogue06]

This sort of ganging up on a person and taking derogatory and denigrating potshots about them at length as if they are not there is pubescent and potentially cruel.

When multiple people from different ends of various spectrums observe the same thing the problem is not likely with the commentators.

[Sparko]

Does that exclude Ted Haggard, Jerry Falwell Jnr, Jim Bakker, and Jimmy Swaggart [just to name a few]?

I am not sure what kind of "gotcha" you think you have there, since you keep repeating it, but it backfired.

We soundly condemn Christian leaders who "talk the talk, but don't walk the walk" - those that lie, cheat, have affairs, while preaching the gospel. They need to be removed from their positions and repent. Even after repenting, they should never hold a position of leadership in the church ever again. And the bible says that teachers and leaders will be judged by a harsher standard also. See 1 Timothy 3.

[rogue06]

There's a habit of chopping up a single connected paragraph into chuncks, and then acting like they are in isolation.

My favorite one so far, is I've had her chop up and remove a post, only to ask a question that was actually answered in the parts of the post she cut out.

I'll do the same, especially with longer posts, so as to address it point by point.

[CivilDiscourse]

I'll do the same, especially with longer posts, so as to address it point by point.

It takes a bit to read for comprehension first. You have to be able to understand if parts of it go together. Your talking about breaking multiple points up, but when multiple sentences go together building or explaining a single point, breaking those up is dumb, as they aren't written to be broken into separate entities.

[mossrose]

Why should it? Are you going to denounce the importance and value of Einstein's work because he was loathsome husband and father?

Newton was also an extremely unpleasant man being, on occasion, both cruelly vindictive and spiteful. Perhaps you should reject Newtonian physics as well!

Then why are you bringing up Falwell and Haggard? Why are you bringing up any of the false preachers and the money they rake in from the gullible, because according to your reasoning, their horrible lives don't affect their message?

You are too stupid for words.

[mossrose]

He was a leading scholar on particular NT texts and is remembered as such.

You appear to consider that a person's achievements in their respective field should be dismissed because of their personal life or behaviours. That is a ludicrous position to adopt, in my opinion.

I have ignored the rest of your post because you appear unable to offer comment without resorting to puerility.

If you wish to seriously address the topic in the manner of a rational grown-up and not in the guise of a thirteen year-old in the school yard I recommend you change your tone.

Your opinion matters not at all to God, and what He has stated in His word. It has nothing to do with a person's achievements, but if one claims to be a believer in Jesus Christ then their lives should reflect that. One can achieve much in the eyes of the ungodly and still it counts as nothing to God.

Your opinion doesn't matter much to the believers here, either.

[Sparko]

It takes a bit to read for comprehension first. You have to be able to understand if parts of it go together. Your talking about breaking multiple points up, but when multiple sentences go together building or explaining a single point, breaking those up is dumb, as they aren't written to be broken into separate entities.

Carpedm used to do that too. Rather than making a response clearer, it serves to make reading the responses more confusing, and replying to THAT post nearly impossible, especially when the first set of responses to the split up sentences is just a terse word or phrase.

[oxmixmudd]

I am not sure what kind of "gotcha" you think you have there, since you keep repeating it, but it backfired.

We soundly condemn Christian leaders who "talk the talk, but don't walk the walk" - those that lie, cheat, have affairs, while preaching the gospel. They need to be removed from their positions and repent. Even after repenting, they should never hold a position of leadership in the church ever again. And the bible says that teachers and leaders will be judged by a harsher standard also. See 1 Timothy 3.

I think there can be a path for reconciliation and restoration in some cases. But it shouldn't be easy just because even if a person is truly repentant there are still reasons that led to the problem that need to be resolved.

In my experience- though it is not by any means extensive- persons that are truly repentant will accept their 'penance' as it were, and those that are not will take offense at the idea it is necessary and walk away.