Censorship under the pretext of upholding netiquette

Ross · Seventh-day Adventist Joined: 07 Jan 2004 Posts: 45

Dear Mr. Gillespie,

I notice that you have been presenting the straight testimony in a time of amazing apostasy. Even people who always thought they were Seventh-day Adventists find it just too much to bear. The direct consequence of that is that they, unable to stand your direct truthfulness and unable to follow your reasoning, find themselves at a stand, and feel forced to attack the man since the logic of the argument is beyond them. Hence the epithets directed at you.

Many, many years ago soon after I became a Sabbath keeper, I ran into astonishingly malevolent opposition and was approached by a lady who delivered this message to me.

"You are going to find life exceptionally hard now." "Every person's hand will be against you, and anything that can be said, will be said." "None of it in your favour." "Your duty henceforth is to move over the ground as smoothly as possible, and that will be achieved largely by ignoring everything said to you or about you."

I was startled by that message, but soon found she was entirely correct. I decided to follow her advice. Well, that was surely a long time ago and simply by following her advice I have impressed others very markedly.
I suggest that you follow suit because that is what the apostle Paul did; knowing this first, not everyone reading these posts necessarily agrees with the adverse comments appended by the administrators.

I believe that you are doing an excellent work and an excellent work needs to be persevered with to the bitter end.

Keep in mind that if it really came to it, Eduardo's case would go down like a pricked balloon since it's data is inherently unstable. It was the best one could do for the time to which it relates, but that is not the time Daniel ultimately points to. It is at best, extremely superficial and cannot bear close examination.

When compared with yours, it is easily noticed that he has fallen into the "fallacy of the illicit process." That is the title given to any work in which the data fails to measure up to the specifications needed to make the case in a truly logical manner. Not only was Antiochus' directions at odds with those in the Bible, but the ultimate timing is off dramatically also, however I guess that administrator has to somehow make friends for his firm and therefore cannot look too closely at the gross errors.

Another point to keep in mind is that some folk who think themselves educated are genuinely unable to reason as do most of the population.
It is simply impossible for them to do so. I must say that Eduardo seems to be a case in point.

Keep pressing on:
Sincerely,
Ross.
_________________
R.R. Pollock

Ross · Seventh-day Adventist Joined: 07 Jan 2004 Posts: 45

Dear Mr Gillespie,

Further to my last post it occurs to me that what we are dealing with is rather like a fork in the path. On one path is the name "Horns." on the other, the name "Winds." Eduardo has chosen the one named "Horns."
Without any reference to Antiochus or to Rome we should always advance by faith.

There is something very significant about those two names for one invites entrance, while the other forbids it because it is grammatically grotesque.

I do not doubt that Eduardo is fully aware of those twin points and that is why I am puzzled as to why he has consistently chosen the wrong one.
Sincerely,
Ross
_________________
R.R. Pollock

gillespie9669 · Posted: Sat Mar 20, 2004 6:19 am Post subject:

Ross,
Thanks for the sentiments expressed. God bless.
_________________
Derrick Gillespie (First labelled "SDA", THEN, "Pseudo-SDA", and then "Impolite". What label next?)