Joined: 29 Aug 2003 Posts: 136 Location: JAMAICA, WEST INDIES
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2004 4:18 am Post subject:
Notice that for just simply stating my view about Eugene's relationship with us his forum users, he re-labelled me as "IMPOLITE". What an 'hopscotch' of name calling within just a few days or so, and how very amusing! If that is not being intolerable and vindictive I don't know what is. Eugene, get a grip! Call me anything you want. What really matters is whether or not I believe you myself, or whether that really does impress your readers. I am really smiling here, laughing is more like it _________________ Derrick Gillespie (First labelled "SDA", THEN, "Pseudo-SDA", and then "Impolite". What label next?)
Chris, You sure are posting a whole lot of angry condemnation without any just cause. Your imaginings are false. You have clearly failed in proving your original complaint. Quoting whole paragraphs is not "twisting what an individual has said."
Roger Ebert didn't refute his own review and you didn't even attempt to refute Eugene's excerpts.
Look, I don't think Roger Ebert even knows eugene is alive much less twisting his review in an attempt to show that Ebert did not like the movie, which is not true, he did. He and his partner gave it two thumbs up.
My meaning is that Roger Ebert didn't refute Roger Ebert's review of the Passion movie. Eugene didn't say that Roger Ebert hated the movie. Eugene doesn't care if Roger Ebert liked the movie or not. Eugene's point is a collection of seemingly credible and truthful testimonies, which tend to show that the movie is evil. The fact that Roger Ebert likes evil and gives it two thumbs up is irrelevant.
The forum philosophy clearly states that a respectful and courteous approach is required of visitors when posting in the high mountain forums. You could have posted a question asking Eugene if his internet excerpts imply that Roger Ebert hated the movie. If Eugene would have affirmed directly that Ebert hated the movie, you then could have asked, "What was the point of Ebert's two thumbs up?"
Chris wrote:
Taking bits and pieces and implying the author was saying something he clearly wasn't is wrong.
Quoting whole paragraphs is what the author was saying and is right. Eugene is right.
Chris wrote:
It is blatantly dishonest to imply that Ebert did not like the movie plain and simple and that is what eugene implied in his post when he couples it with others who did not like it.
No. It is blatantly unchristian to jump to conclusions, imagining great evil in Christ's followers when no evil exists.
Eugene will not respond with any real answer to any question I put to him, including has he actually seen the movie. I therefore am left with only one option and that is to move on.
Eugene,
The Lord's counsel in this matter is clear it is found in the following verses.
Matthey 10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
Mark 6:11 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
Luke 9:5 And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them.
The apostles demonstrated this instruction
Acts 13:51 But they shook off the dust of their feet against them, and came unto Iconium.
I now follow the instructions of Jesus, my personal Lord and Savior, as well as the example of the Apostles. So I do now shake the dust from my feet. Which I am sure will make you exceedingly happy.
Chris _________________ What you tolerate, will happen.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum